Graduate studies at Western
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35 (2):101-113 (1984)
|Abstract||Relationism claims that our physical theory does not commit us to spacetime points. I consider how a relationist might rewrite physical theories without referring to spacetime points, by appealing to possible objects and possible configurations of objects. I argue that a number of difficulties confront this project. I also argue that a relationist need not be Machian in the sense of claiming that objects' spatiotemporal relations determine whether any object is accelerating.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Y. S. (2001). Spacetime as a Fundamental and Inalienable Structure of Fields. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):205-215.
Carolyn Brighouse (1999). Incongruent Counterparts and Modal Relationism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):53 – 68.
Nick Huggett (2006). The Regularity Account of Relational Spacetime. Mind 115 (457):41--73.
D. Dieks (2001). Space and Time in Particle and Field Physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):217-241.
Tim Maudlin (1993). Buckets of Water and Waves of Space: Why Spacetime is Probably a Substance. Philosophy of Science 60 (2):183-203.
Brent Mundy (1989). On Quantitative Relationist Theories. Philosophy of Science 56 (4):582-600.
Mauro Dorato, Is Structural Spacetime Realism Relationism in Disguise? The Supererogatory Nature of the Substantivalism/Relationism Debate.
Dennis Dieks (2001). Space-Time Relationism in Newtonian and Relativistic Physics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15 (1):5 – 17.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #132,105 of 751,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #62,995 of 751,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?