 Truth-functional logic is inadequate for counterfactuals not just because the material conditional \(\supset\) does not capture the fact that some counterfactuals with false antecedents like  (17a)  are false. It is inadequate because there is, by definition, no truth-functional connective whatsoever that simultaneously combines two false sentences to make a true one like  (17b)  and combines two false ones to make a false one like  (17a).  In contemporary philosophy, this is overwhelmingly seen as a failing of classical logic. But there was a time at which it fueled skepticism about whether counterfactuals really make true or false claims about the world at all. Quine (1960: §46, 1982: Ch.3) voices this skepticism and supports it by highlighting puzzling pairs like  (18)  and  (19):  