Search results for 'laws necessity natural kinds' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1. John Bigelow, Brian Ellis & Caroline Lierse (1992). The World as One of a Kind: Natural Necessity and Laws of Nature. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43 (3):371-388.
  2.  50
    John Collier (1996). On the Necessity of Natural Kinds. In P. Riggs (ed.), Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology. Kluwer Academic Publishers 1-10.
    Natural kinds are central to most might decide to restrict systematisation just to scientific reasoning about the world. For that..
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  45
    Cristian Soto (2015). Metaphysics, Laws, and Natural Kinds: Minimalist Approaches. Metascience 24 (2):321-331.
    Debates on the metaphysics of science have steadily gained momentum over the last decade or so. This appears to illustrate a case of philosophers’ realisation that metaphysics—and theoretical philosophy overall—largely depends upon the sciences and has a good deal to learn from them. Recent literature on this, in fact, has reached an unforeseen high level of refinement in the arguments and a very much desirable precision in the consequences that we can derive from examining the interplay currently undergoing between science (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Bernhard Nickel (2010). Ceteris Paribus Laws: Generics and Natural Kinds. Philosophers' Imprint 10 (06).
    Ceteris Paribus (cp-)laws may be said to hold only “other things equal,” signaling that their truth is compatible with a range of exceptions. This paper provides a new semantic account for some of the sentences used to state cp-laws. Its core approach is to relate these laws to natural language on the one hand — by arguing that cp-laws are most naturally expressed with generics — and to natural kinds on the other — (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  5.  68
    Colin McGinn (1978). Mental States, Natural Kinds and Psychophysical Laws. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 52:195-220.
  6.  20
    James Hopkins (1978). Mental States, Natural Kinds and Psychophysical Laws. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 221:221-236.
  7. Tuomas E. Tahko (2015). The Modal Status of Laws: In Defence of a Hybrid View. Philosophical Quarterly 65 (260):509-528.
    Three popular views regarding the modal status of the laws of nature are discussed: Humean Supervenience, nomic necessitation, and scientific/dispositional essentialism. These views are examined especially with regard to their take on the apparent modal force of laws and their ability to explain that modal force. It will be suggested that none of the three views, at least in their strongest form, can be maintained if some laws are metaphysically necessary, but others are metaphysically contingent. Some reasons (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  18
    Stephen P. Schwartz (ed.) (1977). Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds. Cornell University Press.
  9. Martin Leckey (1995). The Necessitarian Perspective: Laws as Natural Entailments. In F. Weinert (ed.), Laws of Nature. Walter de Gruyter 92-119.
    We maintain that there is something called natural necessity that is involved in the laws of nature -laws are concerned with what must happen, and what could not possibly happen. rather than merely what does and does not happen. Some recent believers in natural necessity, such as Dretske [1977], Tooley [1977,1987] and Armstrong [1978, 1983], have argued that this natural necessity arises from certain relations among the properties of things in our world (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Alice Drewery (2005). Essentialism and the Necessity of the Laws of Nature. Synthese 144 (3):381-396.
    In this paper I discuss and evaluate different arguments for the view that the laws of nature are metaphysically necessary. I conclude that essentialist arguments from the nature of natural kinds fail to establish that essences are ontologically more basic than laws, and fail to offer an a priori argument for the necessity of all causal laws. Similar considerations carry across to the argument from the dispositionalist view of properties, which may end up placing (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  11. Quentin Smith (1996). The Metaphysical Necessity of Natural Laws. Proceedings of the Heraclitean Society 18:104-23.
    I begin by defending condition (i) against five objections (section 2). Following this, I show that the theory that laws obtain contingently encounters three problems that are solved by the theory that laws are metaphysically necessary (section 3). In section 3, I criticize the regularity theory of natural laws and the universals theory of Armstrong, Dretske and Tooley, and also show how the metaphysical theory solves the “inference problem” that Van Fraassen (1989) posed for any theory (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12.  73
    Martha I. Gibson (2011). A Revolution in Method, Kant's “Copernican Hypothesis”, and the Necessity of Natural Laws. Kant-Studien 102 (1):1-21.
    In an effort to account for our a priori knowledge of synthetic necessary truths, Kant proposes to extend the successful method used in mathematics and the natural sciences to metaphysics. In this paper, a uniform account of that method is proposed and the particular contribution of the ‘Copernican hypothesis’ to our knowledge of necessary truths is explained. It is argued that, though the necessity of the truths is in a way owing to the object's relation to our cognition, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Alexander Bird (2011). Lange and Laws, Kinds, and Counterfactuals. In Joseph Keim Campbell, Michael O'Rourke & Matthew H. Slater (eds.), Carving Nature at its Joints. MIT Press
    In this paper I examine and question Marc Lange’s account of laws, and his claim that the law delineating the range of natural kinds of fundamental particle has a lesser grade of necessity that the laws connecting the fundamental properties of those kinds with their derived properties.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  29
    Peter van Inwagen (1978). Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds. [REVIEW] International Studies in Philosophy 10:197-199.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  12
    D. H. Mellor (1978). Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds Edited by Stephen P. Schwartz Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977, 277 Pp., £11.25, £3.95 Paper. [REVIEW] Philosophy 53 (203):126-.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  5
    Tyler Burge (1982). Review: Stephen P. Schwartz, Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (4):911-915.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Robert Barry (1980). Stephen Schwartz : "Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds". [REVIEW] The Thomist 44 (1):156.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Tyler Burge (1982). Schwartz Stephen P.. Preface. Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1977, Pp. 9–10.Schwartz Stephen P.. Introduction. Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1977, Pp. 13–41.Donnellan Keith S.. Reference and Definite Descriptions. A Reprint of XL 276 . Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1977, Pp. 42–65.Kripke Saul. Identity and Necessity. Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1977, Pp. 66–101. Putnam Hilary. IS Semantics Possible? Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1977, Pp. 102–118. Putnam Hilary. Meaning and Reference. Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Edited by Schwartz Stephen P., Cornell University Press,. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 47 (4):911-915.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Colin McGinn & James Hopkins (1978). Mental States, Natural Kinds and Psychophysical Laws. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 52 (1):195-236.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. D. H. Mellor (1978). SCHWARTZ, STEPHEN P. "Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds". [REVIEW] Philosophy 53:126.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  83
    Caroline Lierse (1999). Nomic Necessity and Natural States: Comment on the Leckey—Bigelow Theory of Laws. In Howard Sankey (ed.), Causation and Laws of Nature. Kluwer 83--88.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. Herbert Hochberg (1981). Natural Necessity and Laws of Nature. Philosophy of Science 48 (3):386-399.
    The paper considers recent proposals by Armstrong, Dretske, and Tooley that revive the view that statements of laws of nature are grounded by the existence of higher order facts relating universals. Several objections to such a view are raised and an alternative analysis, recognizing general facts, is considered. Such an alternative is shown to meet a number of the objections raised against the appeal to higher order facts and it is also related to views of Hume and Wittgenstein. Further (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  23.  21
    Quentin Smith (2001). The Metaphysical Necessity of Natural Laws. Philosophica 67.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24. Simon Bostock (2001). The Necessity of Natural Laws. Dissertation, University of Sheffield
    I argue that the best explanation of law-like regularity is that properties are universals and that universals are irreducibly dispositional entities.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Danny Frederick (2013). A Puzzle About Natural Laws and the Existence of God. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 73 (3):269-283.
    The existence of natural laws, whether deterministic or indeterministic, and whether exceptionless or ceteris paribus, seems puzzling because it implies that mindless bits of matter behave in a consistent and co-ordinated way. I explain this puzzle by showing that a number of attempted solutions fail. The puzzle could be resolved if it were assumed that natural laws are a manifestation of God’s activity. This argument from natural law to God’s existence differs from its traditional counterparts (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  62
    Stefan Dragulinescu (2010). Diseases as Natural Kinds. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (5):347-369.
    In this paper, I focus on life-threatening medical conditions and argue that from the point of view of natural properties, induction(s), and participation in laws, at least some of the ill organisms dealt with in somatic medicine form natural kinds in the same sense in which the kinds in the exact sciences are thought of as natural. By way of comparing two ‘divisions of nature’, viz., a ‘classical’ exact science kind (gold) and a kind (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  27. Amir Eshan Karbasizadeh (2008). Revising the Concept of Lawhood: Special Sciences and Natural Kinds. Synthese 162 (1):15 - 30.
    The Kripkean conception of natural kinds (kinds are defined by essences that are intrinsic to their members and that lie at the microphysical level) indirectly finds support in a certain conception of a law of nature, according to which generalizations must have unlimited scope and be exceptionless to count as laws of nature. On my view, the kinds that constitute the subject matter of special sciences such as biology may very well turn out to be (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Dennis des Chene, Natural Laws and Divine Agency in the Later Seventeenth Century.
    It is a commonplace that one of the primary tasks of natural science is to discover the laws of nature. Those who don’t think that nature has laws will of course disagree; but of those who do, most will be in accord with Armstrong when he writes that natural science, having discovered the kinds and properties of things, should “state the laws” which those things “obey” (Armstrong What is a law 3). No Scholastic philosopher (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Alexander Bird (2005). The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws. Foundations of Science 10 (4):353-70.
    This paper sketches a dispositionalist conception of laws and shows how the dispositionalist should respond to certain objections. The view that properties are essentially dispositional is able to provide an account of laws that avoids the problems that face the two views of laws (the regularity and the contingent nomic necessitation views) that regard properties as categorical and laws as contingent. I discuss and reject the objections that (i) this view makes laws necessary whereas they (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   20 citations  
  30. Chris Swoyer (1982). The Nature of Natural Laws. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 60 (3):203 – 223.
    That laws of nature play a vital role in explanation, prediction, and inductive inference is far clearer than the nature of the laws themselves. My hope here is to shed some light on the nature of natural laws by developing and defending the view that they involve genuine relations between properties. Such a position is suggested by Plato, and more recent versions have been sketched by several writers.~ But I am not happy with any of these (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   65 citations  
  31. Nora Berenstain (2014). Necessary Laws and Chemical Kinds. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (4):631-647.
    Contingentism, generally contrasted with law necessitarianism, is the view that the laws of nature are contingent. It is often coupled with the claim that their contingency is knowable a priori. This paper considers Bird's [2001, 2002, 2005, 2007] arguments for the thesis that, necessarily, salt dissolves in water; and it defends his view against Beebee's [2001] and Psillos's [2002] contingentist objections. A new contingentist objection is offered and several reasons for scepticism about its success are raised. It is concluded (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  32.  46
    David B. Kitts & David J. Kitts (1979). Biological Species as Natural Kinds. Philosophy of Science 46 (4):613-622.
    The fact that the names of biological species refer independently of identifying descriptions does not support the view of Ghiselin and Hull that species are individuals. Species may be regarded as natural kinds whose members share an essence which distinguishes them from the members of other species and accounts for the fact that they are reproductively isolated from the members of other species. Because evolutionary theory requires that species be spatiotemporally localized their names cannot occur in scientific (...). If natural kind status is denied to species on this ground, it must also be denied to most classes of concrete entities which are now accorded such status. (shrink)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   32 citations  
  33. Kathrin Koslicki (2008). Natural Kinds and Natural Kind Terms. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):789-802.
    The aim of this article is to illustrate how a belief in the existence of kinds may be justified for the particular case of natural kinds: particularly noteworthy in this respect is the weight borne by scientific natural kinds (e.g., physical, chemical, and biological kinds) in (i) inductive arguments; (ii) the laws of nature; and (iii) causal explanations. It is argued that biological taxa are properly viewed as kinds as well, despite the (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  34.  64
    Ian Hacking (2010). Putnam's Theory of Natural Kinds and Their Names is Not the Same as Kripke's. Principia 11 (1):1-24.
    Philosophers have been referring to the “Kripke–Putnam” theory of naturalkind terms for over 30 years. Although there is one common starting point, the two philosophers began with different motivations and presuppositions, and developed in different ways. Putnam’s publications on the topic evolved over the decades, certainly clarifying and probably modifying his analysis, while Kripke published nothing after 1980. The result is two very different theories about natural kinds and their names. Both accept that the meaning of a naturalkind (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  35.  82
    Marc Lange (2000). Natural Laws in Scientific Practice. Oxford University Press.
    It is often presumed that the laws of nature have special significance for scientific reasoning. But the laws' distinctive roles have proven notoriously difficult to identify--leading some philosophers to question if they hold such roles at all. This study offers original accounts of the roles that natural laws play in connection with counterfactual conditionals, inductive projections, and scientific explanations, and of what the laws must be in order for them to be capable of playing these (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   50 citations  
  36.  9
    Marc Lange (2007). Laws and Meta-Laws of Nature: Conservation Laws and Symmetries. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38 (3):457-481.
    Symmetry principles are commonly said to explain conservation laws—and were so employed even by Lagrange and Hamilton, long before Noether's theorem. But within a Hamiltonian framework, the conservation laws likewise entail the symmetries. Why, then, are symmetries explanatorily prior to conservation laws? I explain how the relation between ordinary (i.e., first-order) laws and the facts they govern (a relation involving counterfactuals) may be reproduced one level higher: as a relation between symmetries and the ordinary laws (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  37. Scott Mann (2006). Space, Time and Natural Kinds. Journal of Critical Realism 5 (2):290-322.
    _ Source: _Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 290 - 322 Einstein's special theory, as interpreted by Herman Minkowski, suggests that an understanding of space and time requires the replacement of three-dimensional space and one dimensional time with a four-dimensional spacetime continuum, as a natural kind of thing with a characteristic, geometrical, structure. Issues of space and time in general, and of special relativity in particular, are not addressed in Bhaskar's _A Realist Theory of Science_, and their treatment in subsequent (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Emma Tobin, Natural Kinds, Causal Relata and Causal Relations.
    Realist accounts of natural kinds rely on an account of causation where the relata of causal relations are real and discrete. These views about natural kinds entail very different accounts of causation. In particular, the necessity of the causal relation given the instantiation of the properties of natural kinds is more robust in the fundamental sciences (e.g. physics and chemistry) than it is in the life sciences (e.g. biology and the medical sciences). In (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Emma Tobin, Natural Kinds & Symbiosis.
    Biological species are often taken as counterexamples to essentialist accounts of natural kinds. Essentialists like Ellis (2001) agree with nominalists that because biological kinds evolve, any distinctions between kinds of biological kind must ultimately be arbitrary. The resulting vagueness in the extension of natural kind predicates in the case of species has led to the claim that species ought to be construed as individuals rather than kinds (Ghiselin 1974, 1987; Hull 1976, 1978). I examine (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  19
    Joshua Alexander (2004). Marc Lange: Natural Laws in Scientific Practice. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 71 (2):222-224.
    What is a law of nature? Traditionally, philosophical discussion of this question has been dominated by two prominent alternatives; David Lewis’s best-systems analysis, according to which a law is a regularity that serves as a theorem in our best axiomatization of the facts about the world, and the Dretske-Armstrong-Tooley analysis, which incorporates universals to distinguish laws from mere accidental generalizations. Marc Lange’s first book presents a provocative alternative to this tradition, providing a novel treatment of natural laws (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Tuomas E. Tahko (2015). Natural Kind Essentialism Revisited. Mind 124 (495):795-822.
    Recent work on Natural Kind Essentialism has taken a deflationary turn. The assumptions about the grounds of essentialist truths concerning natural kinds familiar from the Kripke-Putnam framework are now considered questionable. The source of the problem, however, has not been sufficiently explicated. The paper focuses on the Twin Earth scenario, and it will be demonstrated that the essentialist principle at its core (which I call IDENT)—that necessarily, a sample of a chemical substance, A, is of the same (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  42. Harold Kincaid & Jacqueline Anne Sullivan (2014). Classifying Psychopathology: Mental Kinds and Natural Kinds. In Harold Kincaid & Jacqueline Anne Sullivan (eds.), Classifying Psychopathology: Mental Kinds and Natural Kinds. MIT 1-10.
    In this volume, leading philosophers of psychiatry examine psychiatric classification systems, including the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, asking whether current systems are sufficient for effective diagnosis, treatment, and research. Doing so, they take up the question of whether mental disorders are natural kinds, grounded in something in the outside world. Psychiatric categories based on natural kinds should group phenomena in such a way that they are subject to the same type of causal explanations (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  43. Andrew Pyle (2006). Atomism and Natural Necessity. Philo 9 (1):47-61.
    When the atomic theory was revived in the seventeenth century, the atomists faced a problem concerning the status of the laws of nature. On the face of it, the postulation of absolutely hard, rigid, and impenetrable atoms seems to entail the existence of natural necessities and impossibilities: Atoms A and B cannot interpenetrate, so atom A must push atom B when they collide. The properties of compound bodies are to be explained in terms of their “textures” (i.e., the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  80
    Marc Lange (1995). Are There Natural Laws Concerning Particular Biological Species? Journal of Philosophy 92 (8):430-451.
  45.  77
    Raymond Woller (1982). Harre and Madden's Multifarious Account of Natural Necessity. Philosophy of Science 49 (4):616-632.
    In this paper, I critically examine Harre and Madden's attempt, largely as it occurs in their Causal Powers, to secure for causes and laws of nature a kind of necessity which although consistent with commonsensical empiricism and anti-idealistic philosophy of science nevertheless runs counter to the humean-positivistic tradition, which denies the existence of any distinctively "natural" or causal necessity. In the course of the paper, I reveal the multifarious nature of their account and show that each (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  46.  92
    Martin Leckey (1999). The Naturalness Theory of Laws. In Howard Sankey (ed.), Causation and Laws of Nature. Kluwer 77--82.
    If I were to drop an apple, then it would fall. It is not possible that it would fly upwards. It is necessary that it would fall. I think these statements are true, but at the same time I believe that it is not logically necessary that the apple would fall. I believe that there is in nature a kind of necessity weaker than logical necessity: natural necessity.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47. E. J. Lowe (2006). The Four-Category Ontology: A Metaphysical Foundation for Natural Science. Oxford University Press Uk.
    E. J. Lowe sets out and defends his theory of what there is. His four-category ontology is a metaphysical system that recognizes two fundamental categorial distinctions which cut across each other to generate four fundamental ontological categories. The distinctions are between the particular and the universal and between the substantial and the non-substantial. The four categories thus generated are substantial particulars, non-substantial particulars, substantial universals and non-substantial universals. Non-substantial universals include properties and relations, conceived as universals. Non-substantial particulars include property-instances (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  44
    Åsa Wikforss (2013). Bachelors, Energy, Cats and Water: Putnam on Kinds and Kind Terms. Theoria 79 (3):242-261.
    Since Hilary Putnam and Saul Kripke's first attacks on traditional, descriptivist theories of natural kind terms, it has become customary to speak of the ‘Putnam-Kripke’ view of meaning and reference. This article argues that this is a mistake, and that Putnam's account of natural kind terms is importantly different from that of Kripke. In particular, Putnam has from the very start been sceptical of Kripke's modal claims, and in later papers he explicitly rejects the proposal that theoretical identity (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  20
    Christian Schumacher (2012). Especies naturales, leyes causales y conceptos mágicos: una aproximación a lo real maravilloso americano. Areté. Revista de Filosofía 24 (1):153-177.
    Natural Kinds, Causal Laws, Magical Concepts: an Approach to American Magical Realism”. Throughout Latin American history of ideas one can find an alienated relation towards nature, which appears as magical, indecipherable and hostile. The two main characteristics of this idea of nature are the abundance of strange species and the unpredictability of events. In this essay I will argue that the first characteristic is a natural effect of the process of inductive learning under the conditions of (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  52
    John Foster (1983). Induction, Explanation, and Natural Necessity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 83:87-101.
1 — 50 / 1000