ABSTRACT
This chapter argues in support of contingency-skepticism. An examination and assessment of some of the reasons philosophers have offered in support of the belief that some things about the world could have been otherwise shows that none of them works to justify the belief that contingentarianism is true. Philosophers have appealed to the following in support of contingentarianism: experience, the existence of probabilities and indeterminacies, intuition, majority belief, and the meaningfulness of contingency-talk, specifically, counterfactuals. Because none of these attempts to justify contingentarianism works to adequately support the belief that some things in the world are contingent philosophers ought at least to be skeptical with respect to ways things could have been.
