Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This analysis defends the claim that all truths are maximally risky, suggesting modal risk exists alongside probabilistic assessments.
According to the modal account, risk is a function of modal closeness. A puzzling consequence of this account is that all truths are maximally risky. I defend this puzzling claim against several objections found in the literature, by drawing connections between axiom T for safety and risk and between counterfactual reasoning and risk. I conclude by briefly explaining why we find the conclusion puzzling and by advocating for a pluralist notion of risk where modal risk is a legitimate notion alongside the probabilistic one.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marco Grossi (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: