Linked bibliography for the SEP article "Ceteris Paribus Laws" by Alexander Reutlinger, Gerhard Schurz, Andreas Hüttemann and Siegfried Jaag
This is an automatically generated and experimental page
If everything goes well, this page should display the bibliography of the aforementioned article as it appears in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but with links added to PhilPapers records and Google Scholar for your convenience. Some bibliographies are not going to be represented correctly or fully up to date. In general, bibliographies of recent works are going to be much better linked than bibliographies of primary literature and older works. Entries with PhilPapers records have links on their titles. A green link indicates that the item is available online at least partially.
This experiment has been authorized by the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The original article and bibliography can be found here.
- Adams, E. W., 1975, The Logic of Conditionals, Dordrecht:
Reidel. (Scholar)
- Albert, D., 2015, After Physics, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
- Backmann, M. and A. Reutlinger (2014): “Better Best Systems. Too Good To Be True”, Dialectica, 68: 375–390. (Scholar)
- Bird, A., 2005, “The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws”, Foundations of Science, 10: 353–370. (Scholar)
- –––, 2007, Nature’s Metaphysics,
Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Blaug, M., 1992, The Methodology of Economics or How Economists Explain, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2nd Edition. (Scholar)
- –––, 1997, Economic Theory in Retrospect, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd Edition. (Scholar)
- Braddon-Mitchell, D., 2001, “Lossy Laws”, Noûs, 35(2): 260–277. (Scholar)
- Cairnes, J., 1888, The Character and Logical Method of
Political Economy, London: Longman, Brown, Green, and
Roberts. (Scholar)
- Callender, C., and J. Cohen, 2010, “Special Sciences, Conspiracy and the Better Best System Account of Laws”, Erkenntnis. (Scholar)
- Canfield, J., and K. Lehrer, 1961, “A Note on Prediction and Deduction”, Philosophy of Science, 28: 204–208 (Scholar)
- Carnap, R., 1956, “The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts”, in The Foundations of Science and the Concepts of Psychology and Psychoanalysis (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. I), H. Feigl, and M. Scriven (eds.), Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press, pp. 38–76. (Scholar)
- Carrier, M., 1998, “In Defense of Psychological Laws”, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 12: 217–232. (Scholar)
- Cartwright, N., 1983, How the Laws of Physics Lie, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1989, Nature’s Capacities and
their Measurement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1999, The Dappled World. A Study of the Boundaries of Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002, “In favor of Laws that are not Ceteris Paribus After All”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman et al. (eds), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 425–439. (Scholar)
- –––, 2007, Hunting Causes and using them. Approaches in Philosophy and Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Churchland, P., 1970, “The Logical Character of Action Explanations”, Philosophical Review, 79: 214–236. (Scholar)
- Cicero, M. T., 1838, De Officiis, J.F. Heusinger (ed.),
Braunschweig: Vieweg. (Scholar)
- Claveau, F., and J. Girard, 2019, “Generic Generalizations in Science”, Erkenntnis, 84(4): 839–859. (Scholar)
- Cohen, J., and C. Callender, 2009, “A Better Best System Account of Lawhood”, Philosophical Studies, 145(1): 1–34. (Scholar)
- Collins, J., N. Hall, and L.A. Paul (eds.), 2004, Causation and Counterfactuals, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. (Scholar)
- Craver, C., 2007, Explaining the Brain. Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
- Dancy, J., 2004, Ethics Without Principles, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Davidson, D. 1980, Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1984, Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Dray, W., 1957, Laws and Explanation in History, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Demarest, H., 2012, “Do Counterfactuals Ground the Laws? A Critique of Lange”, Philosophy of Science, 79(3): 333–344. (Scholar)
- Drewery, A., 2000, “Laws, Regularities and Exceptions”, Ratio, 13(1): 1–12. (Scholar)
- –––, 2001, “Dispositions and Ceteris
Paribus Laws”, British Journal for the Philosophy of
Science, 52(4): 723–733. (Scholar)
- Dupré, J., 1984, “Probabilistic Causality Emancipated”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 9: 169–75. (Scholar)
- Earman, J, and J. Roberts, 1999, “Ceteris Paribus, There is no Problem of Provisos”, Synthese, 118: 439–478. (Scholar)
- Earman, J., J. Roberts, and S. Smith (2002): “Ceteris Paribus Lost”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 281–301. (Scholar)
- Earman, J., C. Glymour, and S. Mitchell (eds.), 2002, Ceteris
Paribus Laws, Erkenntnis, 57 (Special Issue). (Scholar)
- Eells, E., 1991, Probabilistic Causality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Elgin, M., and E. Sober, 2002, “Cartwright on Explanation
and Idealization”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman,
et al. (eds), Erkenntnis 52 (Special Issue):
441–450. (Scholar)
- Eliot, C., 2011, “Hempel’s Provisos and Ceteris
Paribus Clauses”, Journal for General Philosophy of
Science, 42 (2): 207–218. (Scholar)
- Feigl, H., and M. Scriven (eds.), 1956, The Foundations of Science and the Concepts of Psychology and Psychoanalysis (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. I), Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press. (Scholar)
- Fenton-Glynn, L., 2016, “Ceteris Paribus Laws and Minutis Rectis Laws”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 93(2): 274–305. (Scholar)
- Fisher, R., 1951, The Design of Experiments, Edinburgh:
Oliver and Boyd. (Scholar)
- Fodor, J., 1974, “Special Sciences, or the Disunity of
Science as a Working Hypothesis”, Synthese, 28:
97–115. (Scholar)
- –––, 1987, Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1991, “You Can Fool Some People All of the Time, Everything Else Being Equal; Hedged Laws and Psychological Explanations”, Mind, 100: 19–34. (Scholar)
- –––, 1997, “Special Sciences. Still Autonomous After all these Years”, Philosophical Perspectives, 11: 149–163. (Scholar)
- Friedman, M., 1953/2008, “The Methodology of Positive Economics”, in D. Hausman (ed.), The Philosophy of Economics. An Anthology, Third Edition, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145–178. (Scholar)
- Frisch, M., 2014a, “Why Physics Can’t Explain
Everything”, in A. Wilson (Ed.), Asymmetries of chance and
time, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 221–240. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014b, Causal Reasoning in Physics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Gabbay, D.M., et al. (eds.), 1994, Handbook of Logic in
Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 3:
Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, Oxford: Clarendon
Press. (Scholar)
- Glennan, S., 2002, “Rethinking Mechanist Explanation”, Philosophy of Science (Supplement), 69: S342–353. (Scholar)
- Glymour, C., 2002, “A Semantics and Methodology for Ceteris Paribus Hypotheses”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 395–404. (Scholar)
- Goodman, N., 1947, “The Problem of Counterfactual Conditionals”, Journal of Philosophy, 44(5): 113–128. (Scholar)
- Hall, N., 2007, “Structural Equations and Causation”, Philosophical Studies, 132: 109–136. (Scholar)
- –––, 2011, “Review of Laws and
Lawmakers: Science, Metaphysics, and the Laws of Nature”,
Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 27 September 2011,
available online. (Scholar)
- Hausman, D., 1992, The Separate and Inexact Science of
Economics, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University
Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1998, Causal Asymmetries, New York: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Hawthorne, J., 1996, “On the Logic of Non-Monotonic Conditionals and Conditional Probabilities”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 25: 185–218. (Scholar)
- Hays, W., and Winkler, R., 1975, Statistics: Probability,
Inference, and Decision, New York: Holt, 2nd edition. (Scholar)
- Hempel, C., 1942, “The Function of General Laws in History”, in C. Hempel, 1965, pp. 231–243. (Scholar)
- –––, 1952, “Typological Methods in the
Natural and the Social Sciences”, in C. Hempel, 1965, pp.
155–171. (Scholar)
- –––, 1961–62, “Rational Action”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association, 35: 5–23. (Scholar)
- –––, 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation
and other Essays, New York: The Free Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 1988, “Provisoes: A Problem concerning the Inferential Function of Scientific Theories”, Erkenntnis, 28: 147–164. (Scholar)
- Hempel, C., and P. Oppenheim, 1948, “Studies in the Logic of Explanation”, in C. Hempel, 1965, pp. 245–290 (Scholar)
- Hicks, M., S. Jaag, and C. Loew (eds.), 2023, Humean Laws for Human Agents, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Hitchcock, C., 2001, “The Intransitivity of Causation Revealed in Equations and Graphs”, The Journal of Philosophy, 98: 273–299. (Scholar)
- Hitchcock, C., and J. Woodward, 2003 [EG2], “Explanatory
Generalizations, Part II: Plumbing Explanatory Depth”,
Noûs, 37(2): 181–199. [For EG1, see Woodward
& Hitchcock 2003.] (Scholar)
- Hollander, S., 1985, The Economics of John Stuart Mill. Vol.
I: Theory and Method, Oxford: Blackwell. (Scholar)
- Horgan, T., and J. Tienson, 1996, Connectionism and the Philosophy of Psychology, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. (Scholar)
- Horty, J., 1994, “Moral Dilemmas and Non-monotonic Logic”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 23: 35–65. (Scholar)
- Hutchison, T.W., 1938, The Significance and Basic Postulates
in Economic Theory, New York: Kelly, 2nd Edition. (Scholar)
- Hüttemann, A., 1998, “Laws and Dispositions”, Philosophy of Science, 65: 121– 135. (Scholar)
- –––, 2007, “Causation, Laws and Dispositions”, in M. Kistler, and B. Gnassounou (eds.), Dispositions and Causal Powers, Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 207–219. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “Ceteris Paribus Laws in Physics”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1715–1728. (Scholar)
- –––, 2021, A Minimal Metaphysics for Scientific Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Hüttemann, A. and A. Reutlinger, 2013, “Against the Statistical Account of Special Science Laws”, in V. Karakostas and D. Dieks (eds.), EPSA11: Perspectives and Foundational Problems, Dordrecht: Springer, 181–192. (Scholar)
- Jaag, S. and C. Loew, 2020, “Making best systems best for
us”, Synthese, 197: 2525–2550. (Scholar)
- Jeffrey, R.C., 1971, “Probability Measures and
Integrals”, in R. Carnap, and R. Jeffrey (eds.), 1971,
Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability, Berkeley:
University of California Press, pp. 167–224. (Scholar)
- Johanson, I., 1980, “Ceteris Paribus Clauses, Closure Clauses and Falsifiability”, Journal for the General Philosophy of Science, 10: 16–22. (Scholar)
- Joseph, G., 1980, “The Many Sciences and the One World”, Journal of Philosophy, 77: 773–790. (Scholar)
- Jhun, J., S., 2018, “What’s the Point of Ceteris
Paribus? or, How to Understand Supply and Demand Curves”,
Philosophy of Science, 85(2): 271–292. (Scholar)
- Karbasizadeh, A. E., 2008, “Revising the Concept of Lawhood: Special Sciences and Natural Kinds”, Synthese, 162: 115–130. (Scholar)
- Kaufer, E., 1997, “Reply to Persky”, Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 11(2): 190–191. (Scholar)
- Keynes, J.M., 1891, The General Theory of Employment,
Interest, and Money, London: Macmillan. (Scholar)
- Kim, J., 1985, “Psychological Laws”, in Actions
and Events, E. LePore, and B. McLaughlin (eds.), Oxford: Oxford
University Press, pp. 369–386. (Scholar)
- Kincaid, H., 1996, Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2004, “Are There Laws in the Social
Sciences?: Yes”, in Contemporary Debates in the Philosophy
of Science, C. Hitchcock (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell, pp.
168–187. (Scholar)
- –––, 2008, “Structural Realism and the Social Sciences”, Philosophy of Science, 75: 720–731 (Scholar)
- Kincaid, H., and D. Ross, 2009, The Oxford Handbook of
Economics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Kistler, M., 2020, “Laws, Exceptions and Dispositions”, The Journal for the Philosophy of Language, Mind, and Arts, 1(1): 53–74. (Scholar)
- Kowalenko, R., 2014, “Ceteris Paribus Laws: A Naturalistic Account”, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 28(2): 133–155. (Scholar)
- Kraus, S., D. Lehmann, and M. Magidor, 1990, “Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics”, Artificial Intelligence, 44: 167–207. (Scholar)
- Krugman, P., and R. Wells, 2009, Economics, London:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd Edition. (Scholar)
- Ladyman, J., 2008, “Structural Realism and the Relation between the Special Sciences and Physics”, Philosophy of Science, 75: 744–755. (Scholar)
- Lakatos, I., 1970, Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, New York: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Lange, M., 1993, “Natural Laws and the Problem of Provisos”, Erkenntnis, 38: 233–248. (Scholar)
- –––, 2000, Natural Laws in Scientific Practice, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002, “Who’s Afraid of Ceteris
Paribus Laws? Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Them”,
in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.),
Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 407–423. (Scholar)
- –––, 2005, “Laws and their Stability”, Synthese, 144: 415–432. (Scholar)
- –––, 2009a, Laws and Lawmakers. Science, Metaphysics and the Laws of Nature, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2009b, “Why Do the Laws Explain Why?”, in Dispositions and Causes, T. Handfield (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 286–321. (Scholar)
- Leitgeb, H., 2004, Inference at the Low Level, Dordrecht:
Kluwer. (Scholar)
- Lepore, E., and B. Loewer, 1987, “Mind Matters”, Journal of Philosophy, 93: 630–642. (Scholar)
- –––, 1989, “More on Making Mind Matter”, Philosophical Topics, 17: 175–191. (Scholar)
- Lewis, D., 1973, Counterfactuals. Oxford: Blackwell. (Scholar)
- –––, 1983, “New Work for a Theory of Universals”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61: 343–377. (Scholar)
- Lipton, P., 1999, “All Else Being Equal”, Philosophy, 74: 155–168. (Scholar)
- Loewer, B., 2009, “Why is there anything except physics?” Synthese, 170: 217–233. (Scholar)
- Machamer, P., L. Darden, and C. Craver, 2000, “Thinking About Mechanisms”, Philosophy of Science, 67: 1–25. (Scholar)
- Mankiw, N. G., 1998, Principles of Microeconomics,
Orlando: The Dryden Press. (Scholar)
- Marx, K., 1867, Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie. Das
Kapital Band I, in Marx- Engels-Werke, Vol. 23, Berlin:
Dietz. (Scholar)
- –––, 1894, Kritik der Politischen
Ökonomie. Das Kapital Band III, in
Marx-Engels-Werke, Vol. 25, Berlin: Dietz. (Scholar)
- Marshall, A., 1890, Principles of Economics, Macmillan:
London, Eighth Edition. (Scholar)
- Mas-Colell, A., M. Whinston, and J. Green, 1995, Microeconomic
Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Maudlin, T., 2007, The Metaphysics Within Physics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- McCarthy, J., 1986, “Application of Circumscription to Formalizing Common-Sense Knowledge”, Artificial Intelligence, 13: 89–116. (Scholar)
- Medina, J. de, 1581, De Poenitentia Restitutione et
Contractibus, Ingolstadt, First Edition 1544. (Scholar)
- Mesoudi, A., A. Whiten, and K.N. Laland, 2006, “Towards a unified science of cultural evolution”, Behavioral and Brain Science, 29: 329–347. (Scholar)
- Mill, J. S., 1836/2008, “On the Definition and Method of
Political Economy”, in The Philosophy of Economics. An
Anthology, D. Hausman (ed.), New York: Cambridge University
Press, Third Edition, pp. 41–58. (Scholar)
- –––, 1843, A System of Logic, London:
J. W. Parker. (Scholar)
- –––, 1871, Principles of Political
Economy, New York: A.M. Kelly. (Scholar)
- Millikan, R. G., 1984, Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. (Scholar)
- Mitchell, S., 1997, “Pragmatic Laws”, Philosophy of Science, 64: 242–265. (Scholar)
- –––, 2000, “Dimensions of Scientific Law”, Philosophy of Science, 67: 242–265. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002a, “Ceteris Paribus
– An Inadequate representation of biological Contingency”,
in in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al.
(eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 329–350. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002b, “Contingent Generalizations:
Lessons from Biology”, in Akteure, Mechanismen, Modelle, Zur
Theoriefähigkeit makro-sozialer Analysen, R. Mayntz (ed.),
Frankfurt/New York: Campus, pp. 179–195. (Scholar)
- –––, 2008, Komplexitäten. Warum wir
erst anfangen, die Welt zu verstehen, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
(English translation forthcoming.) (Scholar)
- –––, 2009, “Complexity and Explanation in the Social Sciences”, in Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice, C. Mantzavinos (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 130–145. (Scholar)
- Morreau, M., 1999, “Other Things Being Equal”, Philosophical Studies, 96: 163–182. (Scholar)
- Molina, L. de, 1659, De Instita et Iure, Mainz, First
Edition 1593. (Scholar)
- Moser, P. (ed.), 2002, The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Mott, P., 1992, “Fodor and Ceteris Paribus Laws”, Mind, 101: 335–346. (Scholar)
- Mumford, S., 2004, Laws in Nature, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Nickel, B., 2009, “Generics and the ways of
normality”, Linguistics and Philosophy, 31:
629–648. (Scholar)
- Nickel, B., 2014, “The Role of Kinds in the Semantics of Ceteris Paribus Laws”, Erkenntnis, 79(10): 1729–1744. (Scholar)
- Pearl, J., 2000, Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
- Pemberton, J., and Cartwright, N., 2014, “Ceteris paribus laws need machines to generate them”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1745–1758. (Scholar)
- Persky, J., 1990, “Ceteris Paribus”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4: 187– 193. (Scholar)
- Pietroski, P., 1993, “Prima Facie Obligations, Ceteris Paribus Laws in Moral Theory,” Ethics, 103: 489–515. (Scholar)
- Pietroski, P., and R. Rey, 1995, “When Other Things
aren’t Equal: Saving Ceteris Paribus Laws from Vacuity”,
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 46:
81–110. (Scholar)
- Pollock, J., 1986, Contemporary Theories of Knowledge, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. (Scholar)
- Price, H. and Corry, R. (eds.), 2007, Causation, Physics, and the Constitution of Reality. Russell’s Republic Revisited, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Psillos, S., 2002, Causation and Explanation, Chesham: Acumen. (Scholar)
- Quine, W.V.O., 1960, Word and Object, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. (Scholar)
- Reiss, J., 2008, Error in Economics, London: Routledge. (Scholar)
- Reutlinger, A., 2009, “Review of Markus Schrenk: The
Metaphysics of Ceteris Paribus Laws”, British Journal
for the Philosophy of Science, 60: 229–233. (Scholar)
- –––, 2011, “A Theory of Non-Universal Laws”, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25: 97–117. (Scholar)
- –––, 2013, “Are the Generalizations of
Biology Historical?”, in A. Hüttemann and M. Kaiser (eds.),
Explanation in the Special Sciences. The Case of Biology and
History, Dordrecht: Springer, 131–154. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “Do statistical laws solve the problem of provisos?”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1759–1773. (Scholar)
- Reutlinger, A., and H. Koch, 2008, “Methodological
Individualism and the Epistemic Value of Social
Macro-Explanations”, Percipi, 2: 1–14. (Scholar)
- Reutlinger, A. and M. Unterhuber (eds.), 2014a, Ceteris
Paribus Laws Revisited, Synthese (Supplement):
79(10). (Scholar)
- Reutlinger, A. and M. Unterhuber, 2014b, “Thinking about Non-Universal Laws”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1703-1713. (Scholar)
- Roberts, J., 2004, “There are No Laws in the Social
Sciences”, in Contemporary Debates in the Philosophy of
Science, C. Hitchcock (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell, pp.
168–185. (Scholar)
- Roberts, J. T., 2014, “CP-law statements as vague,
self-referential, self-locating, statistical, and perfectly in
order”, Erkenntnis 79, 1775–1786.
- Robbins, L., 1935/2008, “The Nature and Significance of Economic Science”, in The Philosophy of Economics. An Anthology, D. Hausman (ed.), New York: Cambridge University Press, 2nd Edition, pp. 73–99. (Scholar)
- Rosenberg, A., 1992, Economics – Mathematical Politics or Science of Diminishing Returns?, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Scholar)
- Ross, W.D., 1930, The Right and the Good, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Ross, D., 2008, “Ontic Structural Realism and Economics”, Philosophy of Science, 75: 732–743. (Scholar)
- Rupert, R., 2007, “Realization, Completers, and Ceteris Paribus Laws in Psychology”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 58: 1–11. (Scholar)
- Samuelson, P., 1955, Economics. Introductory Analysis,
McGraw-Hill. (Scholar)
- –––, 1958, Foundations of Economic
Analysis, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University
Press. (Scholar)
- Samuelson, P., and W. Nordhaus, 1985, Economics. International
Student Edition, Singapore: McGraw-Hill. (Scholar)
- Schiffer, S., 1991, “Ceteris Paribus Laws”,
Mind, 100: 1–17. (Scholar)
- Schlicht, E., 1985, Isolation in Economics, Berlin/New
York: Springer. (Scholar)
- Scholz, O. R., 2016, Verstehen und Rationalität.
Untersuchungen zu den Grundlagen von Hermeneutik und
Sprachphilosophie, Frankfurt: Klostermann. (Scholar)
- Schrenk, M., 2007a, The Metaphysics of Ceteris Paribus Laws, Frankfurt: Ontos. (Scholar)
- –––, 2007b, “Can Capacities Rescue us from Ceteris Paribus Laws?”, in Dispositions and Causal Powers, M. Kistler and B. Gnassounou (eds.), Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 221–247. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “Better best systems and the issue of cp-laws”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1787-1799. (Scholar)
- Schumpeter, J.A., 1954, History of Economic Analysis,
Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Schurz, G., 1998, “Probabilistic Semantics for
Delgrande’s Conditional Logic and a Counterexample to his
Default Logic”, Artificial Intelligence, 102(1):
81–95. (Scholar)
- –––, 2001a, “Pietroski and Rey on Ceteris Paribus Laws”, British Journal for Philosophy of Science, 52: 359–370. (Scholar)
- –––, 2001b, “What is Normal? An Evolution Theoretic Foundation of Normic Laws and their Relation to Statistical Normality”, Philosophy of Science, 28: 476–497. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002, “Ceteris Paribus Laws: Classification and Deconstruction”, in Ceteris Paribus Laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 351–372. (Scholar)
- –––, 2004, “Normic Laws, Nonmonotonic Reasoning, and the Unity of Science”, in: Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, S. Rahman, et al. (eds.), Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 181–211. (Scholar)
- –––, 2005, “Non-monotonic Reasoning from
an Evolutionary Viewpoint”, Synthese, 146(1):
37–51. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “Ceteris paribus and ceteris rectis laws. Content and causal role”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1801–1817. (Scholar)
- Scriven, M., 1959, “Truisms as Grounds for Historical
Explanations”, in Theories of History, P. Gardiner
(ed.), New York: The Free Press. (Scholar)
- Silverberg, A., 1996, “Psychological Laws and Non-Monotonic Logic”, Erkenntnis, 44: 199–224. (Scholar)
- Smith, S., 2002, “Violated Laws, Ceteris Paribus
Clauses, and Capacities”, Synthese, 130(2):
235–264. (Scholar)
- Sober, E., 1997, “Two Outbreaks of Lawlessness in Recent Philosophy of Biology”, Philosophy of Science, 64: 432–444. (Scholar)
- Spirtes, P., C. Glymour, and R. Scheines, 2000, Causation,
Prediction and Search, New York: Springer. (Scholar)
- Spohn, W., 1997, “Begründungen a priori – oder:
ein frischer Blick auf Dispositionsprädikate”, in Das
weite Spektrum der Analytischen Philosophie. Festschrift für
Franz von Kutschera, W. Lenzen (ed.), Berlin: de Gruyter, pp.
323–345 (Scholar)
- –––, 2002, “Laws, Ceteris Paribus conditions, and the Dynamics of Belief”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 373–394. (Scholar)
- –––, 2012, The Laws of Belief. Ranking Theory and its Philosophical Applications, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “The Epistemic Account of Ceteris Paribus Conditions”, European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 4(3): 385–408. (Scholar)
- Steel, D., 2007, Across the Boundaries. Extrapolation in Biology and Social Science, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Strevens, M., 2003, Bigger than Chaos, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2008, Depth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2012, “Ceteris Paribus Hedges: Causal Voodoo That Works”, Journal of Philosophy, 109(11): 652–675. (Scholar)
- –––, 2014, “High-level exceptions explained”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1819–1832. (Scholar)
- Strößner, C., 2015, “Normality and Majority: Towards a Statistical Understanding of Normality Statements”, Erkenntnis, 80(4): 793–809. (Scholar)
- Tobin, E., 2005, On the Disunity of the Sciences and Ceteris
Paribus Laws, Dissertation, Trinity College Dublin. (Scholar)
- Unterhuber, M., 2014, “Do ceteris paribus laws exist? A regularity-based best system analysis”, Erkenntnis, 79: 1833–1847. (Scholar)
- Unterhuber, M., and Schurz, G., 2013, “The new Tweety puzzle: Arguments against monistic Bayesian approaches in epistemology and cognitive science”, Synthese, 190: 1407–1435. (Scholar)
- Wachbroit, R., 1994, “Normality as a Biological Concept”, Philosophy of Science, 61: 579–591. (Scholar)
- Ward, B., 2007, “The Natural Kind Analysis of Ceteris Paribus Law Statements”, Philosophical Topics, 35(1/2): 359–380. (Scholar)
- –––, 2009, “Cartwright, Forces, and Ceteris Paribus Laws”, Southwest Philosophy Review, 25 (1): 55–62. (Scholar)
- Weber, M., 1906, “Objektive Möglichkeit und
adäquate Verursachung in der historischen
Kausalbetrachtung”, in M. Weber, 1991, Schriften zur
Wissenschaftslehre, Stuttgart: Reclam, pp. 102–131. (Scholar)
- Weisberg, M., 2013, Simulation and Similarity, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Weslake, B., 2014, “Statistical mechanical imperialism”, in A. Wilson (ed.), Asymmetries of chance and time, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 241–257. (Scholar)
- Wheeler, B., 2018, Idealization and the Laws of Nature, Cham: Springer. (Scholar)
- Whitaker, J. K., 2008, “Ceteris Paribus”, in The
New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, S. N. Durlauf and L. E.
Blume (eds.), London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd Edition. (Scholar)
- Wilhelm, I., 2022, “Tractability and Laws”, Synthese, 200(4): 1–17. (Scholar)
- Williams, M., 1995, Unnatural Doubts. Epistemological Realism
and the Basis of Skepticism, Princeton: Princeton University
Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2001, Problems of Knowledge. A Critical Introduction to Epistemology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Wimsatt, W., 2007, Re-Engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
- Woodward, J., 2000, “Explanation and Invariance in the Special Sciences”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 51: 197–254. (Scholar)
- –––, 2002, “There is no such thing as a ceteris paribus law”, in Ceteris Paribus laws, J. Earman, et al. (eds.), Erkenntnis, 52 (Special Issue): 303–328. (Scholar)
- –––, 2003, Making Things Happen, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- –––, 2010, “Causation in biology: Stability, specificity, and the choice of levels of explanation”, Biology and Philosophy, 25: 287–318. (Scholar)
- Woodward, J., and C. Hitchcock, 2003 [EG1], “Explanatory
Generalizations, Part I: A Counterfactual Account”,
Noûs, 37(1): 1–24. [For EG2, see Hitchcock &
Woodward 2003.] (Scholar)
- Woolridge, J. A., 2009, Introductory Econometrics, Mason:
South Western Cengage Learning. (Scholar)
- Wright, A., S., 2017, “Fresnel’s laws, ceteris
paribus”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,
64: 38–52. (Scholar)