Abstract

Chapter 6 discusses Hume’s argument that nothing could exist necessarily. That argument premises that any necessary proposition has a contradictory negation and that whatever exists can be conceived not to exist. The chapter argues that both claims are false. Counter-examples to the first come from metaphysical theories, identity-statements, color-exclusion, and cases of supervenience. The second needs disambiguating, as “conceivable” can mean “imaginable” or “cannot be known to be false _a priori_.” The principle turns out to be false on both readings. Finally, the chapter rejects Richard Swinburne’s recent attempt to update Hume’s argument.