For Hume and many subsequent philosophers,  P is positively relevant to Q just if it figures in a condition X that is "minimally sufficient" for Q.   The  X we're looking for should be sufficient for Q and such that nothing less  is sufficient.  People talk this way about causes, for  instance, truthmakers, evidence, and reasons for  action.  But, why should there always be an X that is minimally sufficient for Q?  (Try to find one for "time passes.")  Relevance has to be defined some other way. The paper considers some options.



Actualizado Mar 01 de 2017
May 23 de 2017
© 2015 Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas - Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México