This analysis demonstrates the necessity of at least one entity in metaphysics with possible worlds, suggesting a new view on contingency arguments.
Traditional cosmological arguments are often thought to rely fatally on the Principle of Sufficient Reason. This paper develops a contingency argument that does not. Building on Armstrong’s metaphysics, I propose that no non-empty world is accessible from an empty world. From this it follows that, if only contingent entities exist, the accessibility structure of possible worlds forms either a circularity or an infinite regress. Both are ruled out by a well-foundness principle weaker than Schaffer’s Inheritance of Being. Two possible kinds of non-contingent entities are then distinguished—necessary and isolated entities—and the latter are ruled out by an accessibility principle. The conclusion is that at least one necessary entity must exist.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alessio Montagner (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: