The Answer to Kripke's Challenge: How Can A Posteriori Necessity Seem to Be Contingently True?

Abstract

Kripke’s challenge is a demand to explain the appearance of contingency in the case of a posteriori identity of mind and body. The appearance of contingency is present in propositions that are a posteriori identities. Most such propositions are not problematic because the appearance of contingency can be explained in Kripke’s way. Appearance of contingency is present whenever one of the elements in the identity statement refers contingently. In the case of identity of mental and physical, there is no contingent referring and thus it is unexplainable in Kripke's way. However, there is a way to explain the appearance of contingency and it is with the help of the so-called intuition approach, that is the intuition of distinctiveness.