>>> sokol at jhu.edu 12/07/00 03:50PM >>>
At 03:14 PM 12/7/00 -0500, Charles wrote:
>CB: In different circumstances, the elements of the law are not fulfilled.
That is not lose of necessity.
True, but it limits its scope condition or applicability to empirical circumstances. Conclusions may necessarily follow from premises as in the following syllogism:
All hobgoblins are bogymen. All bogymen are scary createures. ergo: All hobgoblins are scary creatures.
The conclusion of that syllogism is necessarily true. But you must admit that the probability of either one of us actually encountering a hobgoblin and being scared by it is quite remote.
(((((((((((((
CB: Scientific laws or generalizations do not concern the non-empirical.