Towards a clarification of probability, possibility and plausibility: how semantics could help futures practice to improve

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the clarification of three qualifiers “probable”, “possible” and “plausible”, which are often used interchangeably in foresight and futures studies practice, but which could obtain added value through a careful distinction. In general, it shows the importance of language as the main tool for futures practitioners.

Design/methodology/approach

Employs semantic and conceptual research.

Findings

Distinction of the three qualifiers has not only semantic importance; it also leads to a better conception of what futures practice could work towards.

Practical implications

Futures practitioners should more carefully apply their vocabulary, since it is their main tool. By carefully distinguishing probability, possibility and plausibility, a better focus on the purpose of futures practice becomes attainable.

Originality/value

Very little effort is spent on the working of language in futures studies. Besides glossaries, there is very little work done in sharpening this major tool. The semantic confusion that reigns within the foresight/futures studies community is mainly due to a lack of involvement in this clarification process. Applied semantics is often considered as burdensome, whereas it should be at the core of how the future is being conceptualized.

Citation

van der Helm, R. (2006), "Towards a clarification of probability, possibility and plausibility: how semantics could help futures practice to improve", Foresight, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680610668045