A Necessity Illusion for Modal Inferences from Conditionals

Moyun Wang,Pengfei Yin,Liyuan Zheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1439102
2018-01-01
Thinking & Reasoning
Abstract:Three experiments examined how people reason about what is possible or necessary when a conditional is true. Participants were asked to indicate whether it was necessary, possible or impossible for a specific instance to conform to one of the truth-table cases (pq, pnot signq, not signpq and not signpnot signq) (not sign = not), given the truth of the conditional. It was found that most participants, inconsistently, judged the pq case as necessary but the not signpq or not signpnot signq cases as possible. Logically, these two kinds of judgments are contradictory. Moreover, a true conditional doesn't imply that a specific instance under the conditional must be pq . Therefore, people demonstrate a necessity illusion for pq cases which contradicts their commitment to the possibility of not signpq or not signpnot signq cases. Existing accounts of conditionals are unable to explain the contradiction and the necessity illusion. We propose an inference dissociation account and explore the theoretical implications of this necessity illusion.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?