Philosophy of Science 67 (1):70-93 (2000)
|Abstract||One of the issues dividing "absolutists" and "relationists" is the question whether all motion is relative motion or, in the words of Earman, spacetime has "structures that support absolute quantities of motion." This paper argues that, despite the enormous literature bearing on the topic, it is problematic to formulate a general criterion for when a quantity counts as absolute in contrast to merely relative in a way that is not hopelessly parasitic on other, presumably distinct, senses of "absolute." Furthermore, I suggest that the vicissitudes of the evolution of the concept of absolute motion have contributed to this difficulty|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Julian Barbour (1989). Absolute or Relative Motion? A Study From the Machian Point of View of the Discovery and the Structure of Dynamical Theories. Cambridge University Press.
Robert Palter (1971). Absolute Space and Absolute Motion in Kant's Critical Philosophy. Synthese 23 (1):47 - 62.
Vera Peetz (1970). Note on Armstrong's `Absolute and Relative Motion'. Mind 79 (315):427-430.
S. Cannavo (1992). Absolute or Relative Motion. International Studies in Philosophy 24 (3):121-122.
D. M. Armstrong (1963). Absolute and Relative Motion. Mind 72 (286):209-223.
A. H. Wertheim (1999). Motion Percepts: “Sense Specific,” “Kinematic,” or . . . ? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):338-340.
Ori Belkind (2007). Newton's Conceptual Argument for Absolute Space. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21 (3):271 – 293.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #46,354 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?