Universal Necessity as an Epistemic Possibility

Metaphysical possibility is commonly treated as a feature of reality rather than merely of our epistemic situation. In this paper, I question that move. Phenomenology gives us representations and experiences of alternatives, but does not appear to establish that these correspond to genuine metaphysical alternatives. Finite agents could deliberate, plan, and experience apparent openness even within a reality in which no genuine alternatives obtain. I refer to this latter view as Universal Necessity, while noting that the expression itself retains the modal vocabulary whose fundamental applicability the view questions. Neither Universal Necessity nor genuine contingency appears epistemically established, although parsimony may provide a modest reason to favour the former.