more on this theme     |     more from this thinker

Single Idea 9429

[filed under theme 2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 1. On Reason ]

Full Idea

There are many forms of reasoning - extrapolation, interpolation, and other arguments from analogy - that are useful but deductively invalid.

Gist of Idea

Many forms of reasoning, such as extrapolation and analogy, are useful but deductively invalid

Source

Stephen Mumford (Laws in Nature [2004], 04.4)

Book Ref

Mumford,Stephen: 'Laws in Nature' [Routledge 2006], p.62

A Reaction

[He cites Molnar for this]

The 24 ideas from 'Laws in Nature'

9408 Science studies phenomena, but only metaphysics tells us what exists [Mumford]
9411 There are no laws of nature in Aristotle; they became standard with Descartes and Newton [Mumford]
9412 You only need laws if you (erroneously) think the world is otherwise inert [Mumford]
9415 Would it count as a regularity if the only five As were also B? [Mumford]
9416 Regularities are more likely with few instances, and guaranteed with no instances! [Mumford]
9422 If the best system describes a nomological system, the laws are in nature, not in the description [Mumford]
9421 The best systems theory says regularities derive from laws, rather than constituting them [Mumford]
9427 For Humeans the world is a world primarily of events [Mumford]
9429 Many forms of reasoning, such as extrapolation and analogy, are useful but deductively invalid [Mumford]
9430 Singular causes, and identities, might be necessary without falling under a law [Mumford]
9431 Pure regularities are rare, usually only found in idealized conditions [Mumford]
9432 Laws of nature are necessary relations between universal properties, rather than about particulars [Mumford]
9433 If laws can be uninstantiated, this favours the view of them as connecting universals [Mumford]
9434 Laws of nature are just the possession of essential properties by natural kinds [Mumford]
9435 A 'porridge' nominalist thinks we just divide reality in any way that suits us [Mumford]
9437 To distinguish accidental from essential properties, we must include possible members of kinds [Mumford]
12248 How can we show that a universally possessed property is an essential property? [Mumford]
9439 The Central Dilemma is how to explain an internal or external view of laws which govern [Mumford]
9441 Regularity laws don't explain, because they have no governing role [Mumford]
9443 It is only properties which are the source of necessity in the world [Mumford]
9444 There are four candidates for the logical form of law statements [Mumford]
9445 We can give up the counterfactual account if we take causal language at face value [Mumford]
9446 Properties are just natural clusters of powers [Mumford]
9447 If properties are clusters of powers, this can explain why properties resemble in degrees [Mumford]