Logical fatalism is a philosophical position that argues that certain propositions about the future are logically necessary, and therefore inevitable. In other words, it is the view that some future events are determined by the logical structure of the world, and cannot be altered by any actions or choices we make.
The idea of logical fatalism has its roots in the ancient Greek philosophy of determinism, which held that all events in the world are determined by prior causes, and that the future is therefore fixed and inevitable. However, the modern formulation of logical fatalism is generally attributed to the 20th-century philosopher J.L. Mackie.
According to Mackie, logical fatalism is based on the principle of bivalence, which holds that every proposition is either true or false. This means that if a proposition about the future is true, it must be true at all times, including the present. Therefore, if it is logically necessary that a certain event will occur in the future, it must be true that it will occur at all times, including the present. This means that the future event is already determined, and cannot be altered by any actions or choices we make.
For example, suppose that it is logically necessary that the sun will rise tomorrow. This means that it must be true that the sun will rise tomorrow at all times, including the present. Therefore, the future event of the sun rising tomorrow is already determined, and cannot be altered by any actions or choices we make. This is what is meant by logical fatalism.
One objection to the idea of logical fatalism is that it seems to imply that we have no free will. If the future is already determined by the logical structure of the world, then it seems that our actions and choices are predetermined, and we have no real choice in the matter. However, proponents of logical fatalism argue that this is not the case. They point out that logical fatalism only applies to certain propositions about the future, and that it does not imply that we have no control over our actions.
Another objection to the idea of logical fatalism is that it seems to undermine the possibility of moral responsibility. If our actions are predetermined by the logical structure of the world, then it seems that we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions. However, proponents of logical fatalism argue that this is not the case either. They point out that while some future events may be logically necessary, others may not be. Therefore, it is still possible for us to make choices that have moral consequences, and to be held responsible for those choices.
In conclusion, logical fatalism is a philosophical position that argues that certain propositions about the future are logically necessary, and therefore inevitable. It is based on the principle of bivalence, which holds that every proposition is either true or false. While logical fatalism may seem to imply that we have no free will or moral responsibility, proponents of the position argue that this is not the case, and that we still have some control over our actions and choices.