Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T01:15:02.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Role of Bridge Laws in Intertheoretic Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Sorin Bangu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What is the role of bridge laws in intertheoretic relations? An assumption shared by many views about these relations is that bridge laws enable reductions. In this article, I acknowledge the naturalness of this assumption, but I question it by presenting a context within thermal physics (involving phase transitions) in which the bridge laws, puzzlingly, seem to contribute to blocking the reduction.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 78 , Issue 5 , December 2011 , pp. 1108 - 1119
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

I benefited from conversations with Margaret Morrison, Robert Batterman, Jeremy Butterfield, Roman Frigg, Eleanor Knox, Anouk Barberousse, Cyrille Imbert, Sam Schindler, Alex Manafu, and Dragos Bagu. I am of course the only one responsible for any errors remaining.

References

Ager, T. A., Aronson, J. L., and Weingard, R.. 1974. “Are Bridge Laws Really Necessary?” Nous 8:119–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bangu, Sorin. 2009. “Understanding Thermodynamic Singularities: Phase Transitions, Data, and Phenomena.” Philosophy of Science 76:488–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterman, Robert. 2002. The Devil in the Details. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Batterman, Robert. 2005. “Critical Phenomena and Breaking Drops: Infinite Idealizations in Physics.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 36:225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterman, Robert. 2008. “Intertheory Relations in Physics.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/physics-interrelate/.Google Scholar
Bedau, Mark. 1997. “Weak Emergence.” In Philosophical Perspectives: Mind, Causation, and World, Vol. 11, ed. Tomberlin, J., 375–99. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bedau, Mark, and Humphreys, Paul, eds. 2008. Emergence: Contemporary Readings in Philosophy and Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickle, John. 1996. “New Wave Psychophysical Reduction and the Methodological Caveats.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56:57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickle, John. 1998. Psychoneural Reduction: The New Wave. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brush, Stephen. 1976. “Statistical Mechanics and the Philosophy of Science: Some Historical Notes.” In PSA 1976: Proceedings of the 1976 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, ed. Asquith, Peter D. and Suppe, Frederick, 551–84. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Butterfield, Jeremy. 2011. “Less Is Different: Emergence and Reduction Reconciled.” Foundations of Physics 41 (6): 1065–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callender, Craig. 2001. “Taking Thermodynamics Too Seriously.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 32:539–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchland, Paul. 1985. “Reduction, Qualia, and the Direct Introspection of Brain States.” Journal of Philosophy 82:8–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchland, Paul. 1989. “On the Nature of Theories: A Neuro-Computational Perspective.” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14:59–101.Google Scholar
Dizadji-Bahmani, F., Hartmann, S., and Frigg, R.. 2010. “Who's Afraid of Nagelian Reduction?” Erkenntnis 73 (3): 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emch, G., and Liu, C.. 2002. The Logic of Thermo-Statistical Physics. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endicott, Robert. 1998. “Collapse of the New Wave.” Journal of Philosophy 95:53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endicott, Robert. 2001. “Post-structuralist Angst-Critical Notice: John Bickle, Psychoneural Reduction; The New Wave.” Philosophy of Science 68:377–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazekas, P. 2009. “Reconsidering the Role of Bridge Laws in Inter-theoretical Reductions.” Erkenntnis 71:303–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feyerabend, Paul. 1962. “Explanation, Reduction, and Empiricism.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 3, ed. H. Feigl and G. Maxwell, 28–97. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry. 1974. “Special Sciences.” Synthese 28:77–115.Google Scholar
Gross, David. 2001. Microcanonical Thermodynamics: Phase Transitions in “Small” Systems. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guggenheim, E. 1949. Thermodynamics: An Advanced Treatment for Chemist and Physicists. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl, and Oppenheim, P.. 1948. “Studies in the Logic of Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 15:135–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooker, C. 1981. “Towards a General Theory of Reduction.” Dialogue 20:38–60, 201–35, 496–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, Paul. 1997. “How Properties Emerge.” Philosophy of Science 64:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemeny, J. G., and Oppenheim, P.. 1956. “On Reduction.” Philosophical Studies 7:6–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon. 1998. Mind in a Physical World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon. 1999. “Making Sense of Emergence.” Philosophical Studies 95:3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon. 2006. “Emergence: Core Ideas and Issues.” Synthese 151 (3): 347–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, C. 2009. “Reduction without Reductionism: A Defence of Nagel on Connectability.” Philosophical Quarterly 59:39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebowitz, J. 1999. “Statistical Mechanics: A Selective Review of Two Central Issues.” Reviews of Modern Physics 71:S346–S347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, T. D., and Yang, C. N.. 1952. “Statistical Theory of Equations of State and Phase Transitions.” Pt. 2, “Lattice Gas and Ising Model.” Physical Review 87:410–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Chuang. 1999. “Explaining the Emergence of Cooperative Phenomena.” Philosophy of Science 66 (Proceedings): S92–S106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Chuang. 2001. “Infinite Systems in SM Explanations: Thermodynamic Limit, Renormalization (Semi-) Groups, and Irreversibility.” Philosophy of Science 68 (Proceedings): S325–S344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marras, A. 2002. “Kim on Reduction.” Erkenntnis 57 (2): 231–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marras, A.. 2006. “Emergence and Reduction: Reply to Kim.” Synthese 151 (3): 561–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. 1961. The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt Brace & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickles, Thomas. 1973. “Two Concepts of Inter-theoretic Reduction.” Journal of Philosophy 70:181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onsager, Lars. 1944. “Crystal Statistics.” Pt. 1, “A Two-Dimensional Model with an Order-Disorder Transition.” Physical Review 65:117–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppenheim, P., and Putnam, H.. 1958. “Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 2, Concepts, Theories, and the Mind-Body Problem, ed. Feigl, H., Scriven, M., and Maxwell, G., 3–36. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Prigogine, I. 1997. End of Certainty. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Primas, Hans. 1998. “Emergence in the Exact Sciences.” Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica 91:83–98.Google Scholar
Reif, F. 1965. Statistical and Thermal Physics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Schaffner, Ken. 1967. “Approaches to Reduction.” Philosophy of Science 34 (2): 137–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffner, Ken. 1976. “Reductionism in Biology: Prospects and Problems.” In PSA 1976: Proceedings of the 1976 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, ed. Asquith, Peter D. and Suppe, Frederick, 613–32. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence. 1967. “Types of Inter-theoretic Reduction.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 18:109–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence. 1993. Physics and Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teller, Paul. 1992. “A Contemporary Look at Emergence.” In Emergence or Reduction? Essays on the Prospects of Nonreductive Physicalism, ed. Beckermann, A., Flohr, H., and Kim, J., 139–53. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Yang, C. N. 1952. “The Spontaneous Magnetization of a Two-Dimensional Ising Model.” Physical Review 85:808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C. N., and Lee, T. D.. 1952. “Statistical Theory of Equations of State and Phase Transitions.” Pt. 1, “Theory of Condensation.” Physical Review 87:404–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zemansky, Mark. 1968. Heat and Thermodynamics: An Intermediate Textbook. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar