more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 8541
[filed under theme 26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 4. Regularities / a. Regularity theory
]
Full Idea
Regularity theories make laws molecular, with no inner causal connections; also, only some cosmic regularities are manifestations of laws; molecular states can't sustain counterfactuals; and probabilistic laws are hard to accommodate.
Gist of Idea
Regularities theories are poor on causal connections, counterfactuals and probability
Source
David M. Armstrong (Properties [1992], §2)
Book Ref
'Properties', ed/tr. Mellor,D.H. /Oliver,A [OUP 1997], p.171
A Reaction
[very compressed] A helpful catalogue of difficulties. The first difficulty is the biggest one - that regularity theories have nothing to say about why there is a regularity. They offer descriptions instead of explanations.
The
41 ideas
with the same theme
[laws are merely patterns in physical events]:
8340
|
I do not pretend to know the cause of gravity
[Newton]
|
15861
|
The laws of nature are mental regularities which we learn by experience
[Berkeley]
|
4773
|
Mill's regularity theory of causation is based on an effect preceded by a conjunction of causes
[Mill, by Psillos]
|
4775
|
In Mill's 'Method of Agreement' cause is the common factor in a range of different cases
[Mill, by Psillos]
|
4776
|
In Mill's 'Method of Difference' the cause is what stops the effect when it is removed
[Mill, by Psillos]
|
14806
|
If the world is just mechanical, its whole specification has no more explanation than mere chance
[Peirce]
|
14871
|
Laws of nature are merely complex networks of relations
[Nietzsche]
|
16942
|
It is hard to see how regularities could be explained
[Quine]
|
9410
|
Physical Laws are rhythms and patterns in nature, revealed by analysis
[Feynman]
|
8541
|
Regularities theories are poor on causal connections, counterfactuals and probability
[Armstrong]
|
8540
|
The introduction of sparse properties avoids the regularity theory's problem with 'grue'
[Armstrong]
|
8582
|
Regularities are lawful if a second-order universal unites two first-order universals
[Armstrong, by Lewis]
|
17671
|
A naive regularity view says if it never occurs then it is impossible
[Armstrong]
|
5460
|
Causal relations cannot be reduced to regularities, as they could occur just once
[Ellis]
|
23543
|
We identify laws with regularities because we mistakenly identify causes with their symptoms
[Fine,K]
|
10412
|
If laws are mere regularities, they give no grounds for future prediction
[Swoyer]
|
14341
|
Dretske and Armstrong base laws on regularities between individual properties, not between events
[Mumford]
|
14340
|
It is a regularity that whenever a person sneezes, someone (somewhere) promptly coughs
[Mumford]
|
9416
|
Regularities are more likely with few instances, and guaranteed with no instances!
[Mumford]
|
9415
|
Would it count as a regularity if the only five As were also B?
[Mumford]
|
9431
|
Pure regularities are rare, usually only found in idealized conditions
[Mumford]
|
9441
|
Regularity laws don't explain, because they have no governing role
[Mumford]
|
4401
|
It is not a law of nature that all the coins in my pocket are euros, though it is a regularity
[Psillos]
|
4397
|
Regularity doesn't seem sufficient for causation
[Psillos]
|
4792
|
A Humean view of causation says it is regularities, and causal facts supervene on non-causal facts
[Psillos]
|
4801
|
The regularity of a cock's crow is used to predict dawn, even though it doesn't cause it
[Psillos]
|
16251
|
'Humans with prime house numbers are mortal' is not a law, because not a natural kind
[Maudlin]
|
9479
|
Dispositional essentialism says laws (and laws about laws) are guaranteed regularities
[Bird]
|
9496
|
That other diamonds are hard does not explain why this one is
[Bird]
|
6746
|
There may be many laws, each with only a few instances
[Bird]
|
6740
|
'All uranium lumps are small' is a law, but 'all gold lumps are small' is not
[Bird]
|
6741
|
There can be remarkable uniformities in nature that are purely coincidental
[Bird]
|
6742
|
A law might have no instances, if it was about things that only exist momentarily
[Bird]
|
6743
|
If laws are just instances, the law should either have gaps, or join the instances arbitrarily
[Bird]
|
6744
|
Where is the regularity in a law predicting nuclear decay?
[Bird]
|
6747
|
Laws cannot explain instances if they are regularities, as something can't explain itself
[Bird]
|
6748
|
Similar appearance of siblings is a regularity, but shared parents is what links them
[Bird]
|
6749
|
We can only infer a true regularity if something binds the instances together
[Bird]
|
6801
|
Accidental regularities are not laws, and an apparent regularity may not be actual
[Bird]
|
6803
|
If we only infer laws from regularities among observations, we can't infer unobservable entities.
[Bird]
|
14385
|
Strict regularities are rarely discovered in life sciences
[Leuridan]
|