Currently i'm reading about truth in metaphysics, but I'm getting stuck with the wording on the truth of propositions. Are these pairs of propositions saying the same thing?

(a.1.) It is a possible truth that p.

(a.2.) It is possibly true that p.

(b.1.) It is a neccessary truth that p.

(b.2.) It is necceserily true that p.

(c.1.) It is a truth that p.

(c.2.) It is true that p.

  • 1
    I think I've seen reasoning such that the secondary cases are arguably mapped to physical sentence-tokens instead of abstract proposition-types. E.g., "It is raining today," is not in itself a possible truth when it is a sentence, because it is not a merely possible thing (at least, if I've uttered it today), but it is possible for it to be true. (There's murkiness in these quarters, since the line between abstract propositions and sentence-types is rather blurry.) Dec 24, 2022 at 14:27


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .