Simplification, Disjunction, and Conditional Reasoning
Simplification, Disjunction, and Conditional Reasoning

Summary/Abstract: Conditionals, undoubtedly, plays an important role in contemporary analytic philosophy, yet their semantic analysis remains a point of persistent and wide-ranging philosophical disagreement. This paper examines the status of simplification of disjunctive antecedents (SDA) within the formal semantics of conditionals. Although SDA is strongly supported by intuitive judgments, it is invalidated by standard minimal change semantics (in the frameworks developed by Lewis and Stalnaker). The paper offers a systematic assessment of the main sources of resistance to SDA, focusing on alleged counterexamples from ordinary language and some related problems from the logical standpoint. It argues that the counterexamples commonly cited against SDA are problematic as decisive test cases, since they depart in important respects from the paradigmatic uses of conditionals targeted by formal semantic theories. At the same time, the paper highlights the role of disjunctive antecedents as an abbreviation device and situates SDA within a broader inferential landscape. Rather than defending a conclusive verdict, the paper clarifies how different possible assessments of SDA bear on the structure and commitments of a Unified theory of conditionals.

• Details
• Contents