more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 17004

[filed under theme 26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 7. Strictness of Laws ]

Full Idea

Nothing has power to break the binding laws of eternity.

Gist of Idea

Nothing can break the binding laws of eternity

Source

Lucretius (On the Nature of the Universe [c.60 BCE], 5.56)

Book Ref

Lucretius: 'On the Nature of the Universe', ed/tr. Latham,Ronald [Penguin 1951], p.172


A Reaction

This seems to be virtually the only remark from the ancient world suggesting that there are 'laws' of nature, so I'm guessing it is a transient metaphor, not a theory about nature. 'Even the gods must bow to necessity'.


The 12 ideas with the same theme [whether laws are necessary, or their truth is qualified]:

Nothing can break the binding laws of eternity [Lucretius]
God has established laws throughout nature, and implanted ideas of them within us [Descartes]
A 'law of nature' is just something which is physically necessary [Chisholm]
Laws describe abstract idealisations, not the actual mess of nature [Harré]
We take it that only necessary happenings could be laws [Harré]
Must laws of nature be universal, or could they be local? [Harré]
Being lawlike seems to resist formal analysis, because there are always counter-examples [Harré/Madden]
If there are no finks or antidotes at the fundamental level, the laws can't be ceteris paribus [Burge, by Corry]
Strict laws make causation logically necessary [Maslin]
Strict laws allow no exceptions and are part of a closed system [Maslin]
A 'ceteris paribus' clause implies that a conditional only has dispositional force [Mumford/Anjum]
Hume's Dictum says no connections are necessary - so mass and spacetime warping could separate [Friend/Kimpton-Nye]