UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES FILOSÓFICAS

For Hume and many subsequent philosophers,  P is positively relevant to Q just if it figures in a condition X that is "minimally sufficient" for Q.   The  X we're looking for should be sufficient for Q and such that nothing less  is sufficient.  People talk this way about causes, for  instance, truthmakers, evidence, and reasons for  action.  But, why should there always be an X that is minimally sufficient for Q?  (Try to find one for "time passes.")  Relevance has to be defined some other way. The paper considers some options.