more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 17009

[filed under theme 26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 8. Scientific Essentialism / c. Essence and laws ]

Full Idea

If someone explains gravity along with all its laws by the action of some subtle matter, and shows that the motion of the planets and comets will not be disturbed by this matter, I shall be far from objecting.

Gist of Idea

I won't object if someone shows that gravity consistently arises from the action of matter

Source

Isaac Newton (Letters to Leibniz 1 [1693], 1693.10.16)

Book Ref

Newton,Isaac: 'Philosophical Writings' [CUP 2004], p.109


A Reaction

Important if you think that Newton is the hero of the descriptive regularity theory of laws. Newton probably thought laws came from God, but he wouldn't object to Leibniz's view, that God planted the laws within the matter.

Related Idea

Idea 17023 I am not saying gravity is essential to bodies [Newton]


The 22 ideas with the same theme [relationship between essences and laws of nature]:

Natural things observe certain laws, and things cannot do otherwise if they retain their forms [Hooker,R]
I am not saying gravity is essential to bodies [Newton]
I won't object if someone shows that gravity consistently arises from the action of matter [Newton]
Each of the infinite possible worlds has its own laws, and the individuals contain those laws [Leibniz]
Gravity is within matter because of its structure, and it can be explained. [Leibniz]
The only permanence in things, constituting their substance, is a law of continuity [Leibniz]
In addition to laws, God must also create appropriate natures for things [Leibniz]
Leibniz wanted to explain motion and its laws by the nature of body [Leibniz, by Garber]
The law within something fixes its persistence, and accords with general laws of nature [Leibniz]
Laws are the necessary relations that derive from the nature of things [Montesquieu]
Things are strong or weak, and do not behave regularly or according to rules or compulsions [Nietzsche]
Chemical 'laws' are merely the establishment of power relations between weaker and stronger [Nietzsche]
All motions and 'laws' are symptoms of inner events, traceable to the will to power [Nietzsche]
Causal laws are summaries of powers [Martin,CB]
A hierarchy of natural kinds is elaborate ontology, but needed to explain natural laws [Ellis]
Dispositions are not general laws, but laws of the natures of individual entities [Place]
Laws of nature state necessary connections of things, events and properties, based on models of mechanisms [Harré]
In lawful universal statements (unlike accidental ones) we see why the regularity holds [Harré/Madden]
Laws of nature are just the possession of essential properties by natural kinds [Mumford]
Most laws supervene on fundamental laws, which are explained by basic powers [Bird, by Friend/Kimpton-Nye]
Powers contain lawlike features, pointing to possible future states [Williams,NE]
Laws are relations of kinds, quantities and qualities, supervening on the essences of a domain [Vetter]