we will start again with this difficult text裹驰，which benefit? we can derive from the model approach to fictions, this approach played an important law in the seventeen center eighteenth century, but this is not a philosophical reason, so which philosophical benefit can we derive from this approach to fictions?

perhaps it does not lie in some positive physics, perhaps the most important benefit does not lie in some positive faces, but rather in a problem, a problem we did not take into consideration until now, a new problem. this issue is raised by our very original belief in fictions.

and we did not pay attention to this problem before, the very original belief we experience in fictions, what are we believing. when we are reading a novel all and grunting it a provisional truth, what are we believing in when we are reading a novel, when we are granting it a provisional truth Leibniz, it's and his followers, I won't repeat their names they are all in the PowerPoint.

Leibniz and his followers in the eighteenth century, show us that belief, belief always implies the implicit postulation of a world, a world in which we believe that is perhaps the most important point, insists second part of my lectures, when it's about belief, it's also about a world in which we believe in which we believe in case of narratives, this world is conceived as different from, however different from our world.

of course that is to say, it is conceived as another possible world, so according to these philosophers, when we grants some truth to a novel, we implicitly postulate another possible world, there is an important point here, the point is that there is a strong link between belief and postulate in a world, I told you that this approach which does not require to speculate on about the subject who believes, and that is an interesting point.

we don't have to speculate about what happens in the subject who believes, this approach is developed in the contemporary semantic of possible worlds, I told you this last week, but of course, this very demanding postulation leads to great difficulties, is very demanding postulation leaves to important difficulties that lately. it's perhaps was the first to make out, perhaps Leibniz was the first to make out those difficulties the fictions.

if fictions were directly referring to a possible world to over possible worlds, they should alone the understanding of the reasons that are determining the world, believing in a fiction shows a law, as to know the reasons which art work in the world. of course it is not the case, as you so when we it's called the this text of Leibniz, it's quite the opposite.

I remind you the main argument the reasons of the events, that occur in a novel are always particular, there are always particular reasons, so they do not provide us any excess do the superior knowledge to know, late god possess of the general reasons, and you remember that the structure of a world according to Leibniz results in a general order, in fact according to Leibniz in this text fictions are inverted the relation between particular and general the particular and the general order, which defines the world.

therefore were thinking about the use of fictions, the positive use of fictions in Leibniz, well fictions may be used in order to make us believe that there are other possible worlds, they may be used, in that sense, but not to develop a true knowledge of these worlds, to some extent. it would be wrong to believe that Leibniz fictions refer to possible worlds, that is true for twelve for his followers, but that is not that simple for Leibniz.

fictions make us believe, there are other possible worlds, but they do not refer to this world, that is to say, they do not express the very structure of a world, well in order to grow a few conclusions from this start of our inquiry develop modalities, I must add something about the content of fictions in this approach, and then something else about the Leibniz of the model point of view on narratives, on narrative that is to say on these fictions, that are setting out on account a story.

so I will expound you three points as conclusions for the second part of my lecture lectures, first of course main question is to know秃殉， how do the same and how does the semantic of possible worlds in the seventeenth and eighteenth century, how does it contribute to our intelligence of fictions specific properties, properties, which in fact justifies some of its essential uses even be involved the most, I guess the most useful way of doing it, he's starting from Leibniz to take some perspective on what I have called the instability of narrative future.

remember what I told you before last week, fiction novels are more than the vague Adam, there are more than the vague Adam, then we learned they are less than a world more than the big Adam the pledge than the world, on the one hand, this enables a certain depiction of other possible worlds, that without this recourse are known only in there generic principle. I told you that, we know there are other possible worlds, but how can we believe in it, that is the main use of fictions, they give us such a depiction of the author world possibilities, but on the other hand, fiction remains fundamentally incomplete, when measured against what he did not so.

it is so in incomplete, that it does not even truly did not a world, narrative fiction views offers the depiction of a certain access to a counterfactual system. only access not even a true representation of it, even though it only gives us a well determined piece of it, now, you perfectly know what I just said, but perhaps we might go further, but hypothesis if we place Leibniz model realism in tarrant phases.

we tried to forget this model realism for a few minutes, we tried to place in parent phases lady theory of modality, what does remain what does remain in that case in this hypothesis ?

well, we can invert the observation of letter of fictions deficiency, let's try to invert these observation by Leibniz, these observations, this observation of fictions deficiency, fiction enables us, fiction enables us to think of the facts, the facts that removed from the cure and system received from the narrative a determined, and relatively limited contents, that is something Leibniz and the model point of view is showing us, fiction enables us to think of the facts that do not a cure in our world.

you must understand that there is more here, then a sport thought experiment, there is more than assault experiment that is important, in the experience of salt as we saw. in the first part assume the lack of these lectures, in the experience of salt well, this experience of salt is mostly? based on an abstraction, you remember this the thought experiment is based on an abstraction, here we have something else for these experience is henceforth assimilated to counter facts to counter fact.

that is to say to shop to possible facts, and this is the first point I want to emphasize possible facts or to say better , I perfect hypothetical facts, so this is the first point, the first benefit of the model approach is to show that fictions are about hypothetical facts in the philosophical language.

we would say couldn't of facts must understand possible facts that do not occur in our world, end there is something else, the sort that applies to these counter facts, in order to read them to reach them the sort that applies to the skin to facts, requires an account that is what we learn here, in order to think about jus counter facts.

we have to figure on account the story, I means this is the case that the novel hero outstanding in interest rates as it is also clear that fictional discourse is the only means of access to the events, that affected that is something very important, and you will see that this will be very important in the Europe in the European enlightenment, what are fictions about counter facts, how can the thought apply to the counter fact, through an account a story, remember this, this will be very important well, if this is true if we learned it's by adopting the model approach.

why model really isn't why model realism on fictions, I mean I gave you some reasons, but not all of them not all of them truth be told truth, be told the real relatively unstable status of narrative fictions in the works of Leibniz would in itself justify to abandon modal real reason, could be enough, even though we have seen that the inventors of aesthetics drawing inspiration from Wollf come to a clearer decision.

but on the philosophical purely philosophical point of view, we already have many reasons to forego model realism, the difficulty comes from the fact that these authors I mean the inventors of aesthetics in the eighteenth century, these authors simplistic perspective does not say everything about the later, and truly problematic uses of fiction, are they are encountered in particular in empiricism, you will see that in empiricism fiction paradoxically served historically inspired inquiry.

so this seems card also perhaps it is, but fictions will be will play a very important law in every season in order to achieve an historical inquiry, I know this is the paradox, there is something, but now we learned that very something in common between fictions and history, I mean the facts the consideration of facts, of course, they are not the same facts but you will see perhaps today at least on Wednesday , that for this reason fictions play an important law are very important in the history, called method promoted by the emperor to understand fiction now.

I will not say it like this way, to understand this use of fiction in a historical method, to understand how it's going to work, narrative fiction must be given a temporal dimension, we must give a temporal dimension to narrative fiction, the temporal dimension that precisely is relegated to a secondary position, or even simply eliminated from Leibniz theory on modalities, that is a point, that is the last reason why we have to forego model realism, the fact that the temporal dimension and even not even not only temporal, but temporizing dimension of fiction is eliminated in Leibniz model theory, I guess you know.

why染乌？

you remember late in its definition of time, but I will give you a proof, I will give you a proof for proof of this, I only have to examine a final use of it's a novel argument, the example of novels last user of the novel argument in Leibniz.

a use which this time does not go back to all there possible worlds, in the case, I’m going be interested in, the use of the novel argument won't go back to all the possible worlds, but to the world actually created by god, our well world, of course is also a possible world, but a possible world which gained an access to existence, so let's consider this last use of the novel argument.