Philosophy of Science 75 (5):799-816 (2008)
|Abstract||In my contribution to the Symposium ("On the Vagaries of Determinism and Indeterminism"), I will identify several issues that arise in trying to decide whether Newtonian particle mechanics qualifies as a deterministic theory. I'll also give a mini-tutorial on the geometry and dynamical properties of Norton's dome surface. The goal is to better understand how his example works, and better appreciate just how wonderfully strange it is.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Douglas N. Walton (1992). Slippery Slope Arguments. Oxford University Press.
Julia Tanner (2009). The Argument From Marginal Cases and the Slippery Slope Objection. Environmental Values 18 (1):51-66.
David Resnik (1994). Debunking the Slippery Slope Argument Against Human Germ-Line Gene Therapy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (1):23-40.
Jeanne Salmon Freeman (1996). Arguing Along the Slippery Slope of Human Embryo Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (1):61-81.
Hugh LaFollette (2005). Living on a Slippery Slope. Journal of Ethics 9 (3-4):475 - 499.
Thomas Douglas (2010). Intertemporal Disagreement and Empirical Slippery Slope Arguments. Utilitas 22 (2):184-197.
John Norton (2000). What Is a Newtonian System? The Failure of Energy Conservation and Determinism in Supertasks. Synthese 124 (2):281 - 293.
Jonathan Hughes (2000). Consequentialism and the Slippery Slope: A Response to Clark. Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):213–220.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #26,452 of 722,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)30 ( #4,075 of 722,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?