r degrees - as well as presence or absence. In practice, these concepts are expressed in sentences by words like in some cases raquo ;, sometimes raquo ;, can raquo ;, may raquo ;, might raquo ;, possibly raquo ;, potentially raquo ;, laquo ; permissibly raquo ;, perhaps raquo ;, and all their related terms. The differences between these modal expressions are not merely verbal [5,239].
. 1 Modality and its types
. Kratzer, F.R. Palmer consider that there are six main types of modality. Six senses in which the various categories of modality may be understood. Within each type, all the categories occur, but with other meanings than in the other types. The categories have similar interrelationships and properties within each type. These uniformities allow us to abstract them, but nevertheless each type needs to be considered separately. The interactions between types must also be analyzed [6]. , Or extensional modality, is the primary type of modality. And Aristotle thoroughly dealt with it .We are not consistent in our everyday use of terms like sometimes raquo ;, can raquo ;, may raquo ;, might raquo ;, must raquo ;, and so on [7,7 ].
Ultimately these are semantic issues, not important to us. Though we must pointing out them. Logic simply establishes conventions for terminology, and focuses on the material issues. more, temporal modality and natural modality interact intimately with quantity. Temporal and natural modality may be called intrinsic modalities, because they concern the properties of concrete individuals; extensional modality is comparatively extrinsic raquo ;, in that it focuses on abstract universals. While it is true that often the copula is is intended in a timeless sense, we sometimes use the word with a more restrictive connotation involving temporal limits.temporal equivalent of what is a singular instance in extension, is a momentary occurrence. This is the unit under consideration here. When we say N is M we may mean either that N is always M, or that N is now M, or even that N is sometimes M. This ambiguity must be taken into consideration by Logic. A possible modification of standard propositions is therefore through the factor of temporal frequency.most significant type of modality is called natural modality. This refers to propositions such as N can be M raquo ;, N can not be M raquo ;, N can not-be M raquo ;, and N must be M raquo ;, with the sense of real, out-there potential or necessity. Aristotle in his philosophical discussions, recognized these relations, but he not systematically dealt with them in the framework of his logic works.modality radically differs from such modality. We do not here merely recognize that something may be sometimes one thing and sometimes another, or always or never so and so. We tend to go a step further, and regard that there is a character intrinsic to the object which makes it able to behave in this way or that, or incapable of doing so or forced to do so. Thus, temporal and natural modalities represent distinct outlooks, which can not be freely interchanged.need to indicate two other main types of modality, the logical and the ethical. As it is previously stated, these types are each unique, and worthy of thorough treatment on their own.modality expresses the compatibility or otherwise of a proposed assumption with the general framework of our knowledge to date. Logical modality makes use of terms such as might (or perhaps) and surely (or certainly), for possibility and necessity. Remember that we defined truth and falsehood as contextual, so this definition fits in consistently.the extent that such an evaluation is scientific, based on rigorous process, thorough, common public knowledge, and so on, it is objective information. To the extent that thought is deficient in its methodology, such modality is subjective.the extensional, temporal and natural types of modality may be called materialistic raquo ;, in that they refer directly to the world out there, which is mainly material or in any case substantial, logical modality may be called formalistic raquo ;, because it operates on a more abstract plane.statements tacitly refer to some value to be safeguarded or pursued, and consider the compatibility or otherwise of some proposed event with that given standard. We use terms such may (for permissible) and should (for imperatives), to indicate ethical possibility or necessity.modality is of course relative to standards of value. An ethical statement can in principle be judged true or false like any otheres into play here, not only in the matter of selecting basic values, but also to the extent that, in this field more than any other, factual knowledge is often very private.must, of course, eventually analyze such modality types in detail. But for our present purposes...
