David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Dialectica 64 (3):363-384 (2010)
The conservation laws do not establish the central premise within the argument from causal overdetermination – the causal completeness of the physical domain. Contrary to David Papineau, this is true even if there is no non-physical energy. The combination of the conservation laws with the claim that there is no non-physical energy would establish the causal completeness principle only if, at the very least, two further causal claims were accepted. First, the claim that the only way that something non-physical could affect a physical system is by affecting the amount of energy or momentum within it, or redistributing the energy and momentum within it. Second, the claim that redistribution of energy and momentum cannot be brought about without supplying energy or momentum. Both of these claims, however, are exceedingly difficult to defend in the context of the argument.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jaegwon Kim (2005). Physicalism, or Something Near Enough. Princeton University Press.
John R. Searle (1984). Minds, Brains and Science. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Agustin Vicente (2013). Where to Look for Emergent Properties. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 27 (137):156.
Similar books and articles
C. Hoefer (2000). Energy Conservation in GTR. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 31 (2):187-199.
David Atkinson (2007). Losing Energy in Classical, Relativistic and Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (1):170-180.
David Atkinson (2009). Nonconservation of Energy and Loss of Determinism I. Infinitely Many Colliding Balls. Foundations of Physics 39 (8):937-957.
Robert Larmer (2009). Divine Agency and the Principle of the Conservation of Energy. Zygon 44 (3):543-557.
Dennis Lehmkuhl (2011). Mass-Energy-Momentum: Only There Because of Spacetime? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62 (3):453-488.
Alexander Afriat & Ermenegildo Caccese (2010). The Relativity of Inertia and Reality of Nothing. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 41 (1):9-26.
Ulrich Mohrhoff (1997). Interactionism, Energy Conservation, and the Violation of Physical Laws. Physics Essays 10 (4):651–665.
Robert A. Larmer (1986). Mind-Body Interactionism and the Conservation of Energy. International Philosophical Quarterly 26 (September):277-85.
Agustín Vicente (2006). On the Causal Completeness of Physics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (2):149 – 171.
Edward W. Averill & Bernard Keating (1981). Does Interactionism Violate a Law of Classical Physics? Mind 90 (January):102-7.
Mark Zangari (1992). Adding Potential to a Physical Theory of Causation. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:261-273.
David Fair (1979). Causation and the Flow of Energy. Erkenntnis 14 (3):219 - 250.
Vladimir Doljenko (2008). Dialectics Process - Harmony of Life. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 9:85-92.
Added to index2010-10-20
Total downloads72 ( #66,711 of 1,902,713 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #59,772 of 1,902,713 )
How can I increase my downloads?