more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 6772

[filed under theme 26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 1. Laws of Nature ]

Full Idea

I suspect that what we mean by 'mass' and 'matter' depends on our identifying the existence of laws of inertia and gravity; hence the idea of a world without laws is incoherent, for there to be anything at all there must be some laws and some kinds.

Gist of Idea

Existence requires laws, as inertia or gravity are needed for mass or matter

Source

Alexander Bird (Philosophy of Science [1998], Ch.3)

Book Ref

Bird,Alexander: 'Philosophy of Science' [UCL Press 2000], p.113


A Reaction

I find this counterintuitive. Reasonably stable existence requires something reasonably like laws. We only understand the physical world because we interact with it. But neither of those is remotely as strong as Bird's claim.


The 40 ideas with the same theme [nature and status of the regularities of nature]:

Greeks explained regularity by intellectual design, not by laws [Democritus, by Frede,M]
Principles of things are not hidden features of forms, but the laws by which they were formed [Newton]
The principles of my treatise are designed to fit with a belief in God [Newton]
God's laws would be meaningless without internal powers for following them [Leibniz]
Each possible world contains its own laws, reflected in the possible individuals of that world [Leibniz]
An entelechy is a law of the series of its event within some entity [Leibniz]
Euler said nature is instrinsically passive, and minds cause change [Euler, by Ellis]
Scientists don't know the cause of magnetism, and only discover its regulations [Reid]
Laws are rules for effects, but these need a cause; rules of navigation don't navigate [Reid]
The principle of the law of nature is that matter is passive, and is acted upon [Reid]
The world is full of variety, but laws seem to produce uniformity [Peirce]
Our laws of nature may be the result of evolution [Peirce]
In religious thought nature is a complex of arbitrary acts by conscious beings [Nietzsche]
The law of gravity has many consequences beyond its grounding observations [Russell]
General relativity assumes laws of nature are the same in all frames of reference [Einstein, by Close]
Science depends on laws of nature to study unobserved times and spaces [Armstrong]
A universe couldn't consist of mere laws [Armstrong]
For 'passivists' behaviour is imposed on things from outside [Ellis]
The laws of nature imitate the hierarchy of natural kinds [Ellis]
Laws of nature tend to describe ideal things, or ideal circumstances [Ellis]
We must explain the necessity, idealisation, ontology and structure of natural laws [Ellis]
Laws don't exist in the world; they are true of the world [Ellis]
Newton's First Law cannot be demonstrated experimentally, as that needs absence of external forces [Harré]
Classification is just as important as laws in natural science [Harré]
Physics aims for a list of natural properties [Lewis]
Physics discovers laws and causal explanations, and also the natural properties required [Lewis]
The normative view says laws show the natural behaviour of natural kind members [Lowe, by Mumford/Anjum]
In the 'laws' view events are basic, and properties are categorical, only existing when manifested [Mumford]
There are four candidates for the logical form of law statements [Mumford]
Laws of nature are ontological bedrock, and beyond analysis [Maudlin]
Laws are primitive, so two indiscernible worlds could have the same laws [Maudlin]
Fundamental laws say how nature will, or might, evolve from some initial state [Maudlin]
Laws are explanatory relationships of things, which supervene on their essences [Bird]
Newton's laws cannot be confirmed individually, but only in combinations [Bird]
Parapsychology is mere speculation, because it offers no mechanisms for its working [Bird]
Existence requires laws, as inertia or gravity are needed for mass or matter [Bird]
Science may have uninstantiated laws, inferred from approaching some unrealised limit [Ladyman/Ross]
Many causal laws do not refer to kinds, but only to properties [Chakravartty]
Dispositional essentialism says fundamental laws of nature are strict, not ceteris paribus [Corry]
Any process can go backwards or forwards in time without violating the basic laws of physics [Ingthorsson]