It seems to be: I've never heard of anyone being converted to modal realism, or giving it up. In particular, Lewis himself endorses it in his earliest papers, e.g. in the conclusion of 'Convention'. According to this article from the Daily Princetonian, he "worked on" the topic already at the age of 16. Strange.
Hi, I'm a korean undergraduate of philosophy (Korea University). Actually while I found an account of 'two-way eternal recurrence', I reached your weblog. I think this place is very nice! Anyway, I am a counterexample of your conjecture about modal realist. I converted one years ago after investigating 'On the Plurality of Worlds'. Before I fought with extreme modal realism, I strongly believed that Kripkean concept of possible world was the best plausible account of that. I am very glad to be here, and I hope I could write something here again. And... I want you to explain what two-way eternal recurrence means (I saw this in Lewis's 'Tensed Quantifiers'). Bye~ Happy New Year.
Hi, thanks. A world of two-way eternal recurrence is a world without beginning and end where history always repeats itself.
Thanks you very much. Then would you tell me that when and where was the story of a world of two (or more)-way eternal recurrence appeared? e.g. Leibniz's such and such story. I want to know the origin of that and the author(s) who is(are) treat this world as an important item in philosophical problems.
As a quick google search will tell you, the idea of eternal recurrence is due to Nietzsche, who took it to be quite important. It's used for rather different reasons in analytic philosophy, where it provides a nice illustration for all kinds of possible predicaments. Though worlds with, say, infinite spatial duplication would usually do just as well for that purpose.
Alternatively, one can use temporally or spatially symmetric worlds, seems to me.
Hey, the link to the princetonian is dead. Can you put the article up on a web page?
Cheers,barce