Modal Logic Question

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

@Ichthus77

10:40 B corollary it’s poss nec A implies A is in fact the case (one way to read: whatever is possibly necessary is in fact the case)

Question: If whatever is necessary is in fact the case (Axiom M), why are only one of those corollaries controversial? Modal ontological argument? Why only one results in it?

Prolly same reason folks prefer Boole to Aristotle on existential import, I’m guessing.