Ratio 33 (1):1-13 (2020)

Authors
David Braddon-Mitchell
University of Sydney
Lok-Chi Chan
National Taiwan University
Andrew James Latham
University of Sydney
Abstract
Monism is our name for a range of views according to which the connection between dispositions and their categorical bases is intimate and necessary, or on which there are no categorical bases at all. In contrast, Dualist views hold that the connection between dispositions and their categorical bases is distant and contingent. This paper is a defence of Monism against an influential conceivability argument in favour of Dualism. The argument suggests that the apparent possibility of causal behaviour coming apart from categorical bases is best explained by Dualism. We argue that Monism can explain the apparent possibility as well, if we take metaphysically alien laws — namely, laws whose metaphysical nature is alien to the actual world — into account.
Keywords Humeanism  Langton  categoricalism  dispositionalism  modal intuition
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/rati.12248
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Nature’s Metaphysics.Alexander Bird - 2007 - Oxford University Press.
What is a Law of Nature?D. M. Armstrong - 1983 - Cambridge University Press.
From an Ontological Point of View.John Heil - 2003 - Oxford University Press.
Causality and Properties.Sydney Shoemaker - 1980 - In Peter van Inwagen (ed.), Time and Cause. D. Reidel. pp. 109-35.
Laws of Nature.Fred Dretske - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (2):248-268.

View all 46 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Categoricalism Versus Dispositionalism: A Case Study in Metametaphysics.Cord Friebe - 2014 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 45 (1):5-15.
Bird Against the Humeans.Harold Noonan - 2010 - Ratio 23 (1):73-86.
Dispositions and the Argument From Science.Neil E. Williams - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (1):71 - 90.
Dispositionalism, Categoricalism, and Metaphysical Naturalism.Travis Dumsday - 2014 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 88:101-112.
The Modal Status of Laws: In Defence of a Hybrid View.Tuomas E. Tahko - 2015 - Philosophical Quarterly 65 (260):509-528.
Modal Epistemology and the Rationalist Renaissance.George Bealer - 2002 - In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 71-125.
Humean Laws and Explanation.Daniel Graham Marshall - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (12):3145-3165.
Conceiving What is Not There.Andrew Botterell - 2001 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 8 (8):21-42.
Goodbye, Humean Supervenience.Troy Cross - 2012 - Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 7:129-153.
Can Bare Dispositions Explain Categorical Regularities?Tyler Hildebrand - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 167 (3):569-584.
Laws, Explanation, Governing, and Generation.Barry Ward - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (4):537 – 552.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-08-10

Total views
179 ( #51,059 of 2,385,845 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
38 ( #19,600 of 2,385,845 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes