Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (2):307-324 (2007)

Authors
Susan Schneider
Florida Atlantic University
Abstract
Recently, proponents of Humean Supervenience have challenged the plausibility of the intuition that the laws of nature ‘govern’, or guide, the evolution of events in the universe. Certain influential thought experiments authored by John Carroll, Michael Tooley, and others, rely strongly on such intuitions. These thought experiments are generally regarded as playing a central role in the lawhood debate, suggesting that the Mill-Ramsey-Lewis view of the laws of nature, and the related doctrine of the Humean Supervenience of laws, are false. In this paper, I take on these recent challenges, arguing that the intuition that the laws govern should be taken seriously. Still, I find the recent discussions insightful, in certain ways. Employing some ideas from one of the critics, I draw some non-standard conclusions about the significance of the thought experiments to the lawhood debate.
Keywords Laws   Philosophy of Science
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1080/00048400701343119
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,417
External links

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

Laws and Symmetry.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1989 - Oxford University Press.
Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 431-433.
The Metaphysics Within Physics.Tim Maudlin - 2007 - Oxford University Press.
Humean Supervenience Debugged.David Lewis - 1994 - Mind 103 (412):473--490.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No Laws and (Thin) Powers in, No (Governing) Laws Out.Stavros Ioannidis, Vassilis Livanios & Stathis Psillos - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (1):1-26.
Fundamental Properties and the Laws of Nature.Heather Demarest - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (5):334-344.
General Solution to All Philosophical Problems With Some Exceptions.Wayde Beasley - forthcoming - north of parallel 40: Numerous uncommitted.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Non-Governing Conception of Laws of Nature.Helen Beebee - 2000 - Philosophical and Phenomenological Research 61 (3):571-594.
Laws, Explanation, Governing, and Generation.Barry Ward - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (4):537 – 552.
Laws of Nature: Meeting the Empiricist Challenge.John Thomas Roberts - 1999 - Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
Humean Supervenience and Best-System Laws.Lydia Jaeger - 2002 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (2):141 – 155.
Laws and Lawlessness.Stephen Mumford - 2005 - Synthese 144 (3):397-413.
The Law Governed Universe.John T. Roberts - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
It is the Business of Laws to Govern.Jonathan Schaffer - 2016 - Dialectica 70 (4):577-588.
Laws of Nature and Free Will.Pedro Merlussi - 2017 - Dissertation, Durham University
Nailed to Hume's Cross?John Carroll - 2008 - In Theodore Sider, John Hawthorne & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Blackwell. pp. 67--81.
Laws of Nature.Walter Ott & Lydia Patton - 2018 - Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Are Conservation Laws Metaphysically Necessary?Johanna Wolff - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (5):898-906.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
185 ( #56,826 of 2,449,096 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #115,828 of 2,449,096 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes