Contra a Necessidade Metafísica da lei "O Sal se Dissolve em Água"
Abstract
In this paper, I intend to argue against Alexander Bird‟s thesis (2001) that the law salt dissolves in
water is metaphysically necessary. I briefly indicate Bird‟s argument for the necessity of such law,
and then I provide a counter-argument to his thesis. In a general way, Bird wants to show that the
existence of certain substances depends on the truth of certain laws, and that because of this the
existence of such substances implies the existence of such laws. That would make the laws existing
at least while the substance it rules exists; what, for Bird, makes such laws metaphysically
necessary. My counter-argument to Bird is that such conception apprehends just what we call “weak
necessity”, and not the strong necessity we would like a metaphysically necessary law to have.