David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (2):159 – 170 (1990)
Abstract The paper develops a unified account of both deterministic and indeterministic laws of nature which inherits the merits but not the defects of the best existing accounts. As in Armstrong's account, laws are embodied in facts about universals; but not in higher?order relations between them, and the necessity of laws is not primitive but results from their containing chances of 0 or 1. As in the Ramsey?Lewis account, law statements would be the general axioms and theorems of the simplest deductive theory of everything; but because laws are not so defined, simplicity of statement is not a criterion of law?hood
|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
D. M. Armstrong (1983). What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge University Press.
Rudolf Carnap (1966). Philosophical Foundations of Physics;. New York,Basic Books, Inc..
Bruno De Finetti (1989). Probabilism. Erkenntnis 31 (2-3):169-223.
Fred I. Dretske (1977). Laws of Nature. Philosophy of Science 44 (2):248-268.
Bruno De Finetti (1989). Probabilism: A Critical Essay on the Theory of Probability and on the Value of Science. Erkenntnis 31 (2/3):169 - 223.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Anjan Chakravartty (2003). The Dispositional Essentialist View of Properties and Laws. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (4):393 – 413.
Alice Drewery (2001). Dispositions and Ceteris Paribus Laws. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (4):723-733.
Stephen Mumford (2005). Laws and Lawlessness. Synthese 144 (3):397?413.
Richard Swinburne (2004). The Argument From Laws of Nature Reassessed. In M. Ruse & W. Dembski (eds.), Debating Design: From Darwin to Dna. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Alexander Bird (2005). The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws. Foundations of Science 10 (4):353-70.
Chris Swoyer (1982). The Nature of Natural Laws. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 60 (3):203 – 223.
Marc Lange (2006). How to Account for the Relation Between Chancy Facts and Deterministic Laws. Mind 115 (460):917--946.
Luke Glynn (2010). Deterministic Chance. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (1):51–80.
Marc Lange (2006). Do Chances Receive Equal Treatment Under the Laws? Or: Must Chances Be Probabilities? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (2):383-403.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads109 ( #11,819 of 1,413,272 )
Recent downloads (6 months)43 ( #3,162 of 1,413,272 )
How can I increase my downloads?