more from Harré,R./Madden,E.H.

Single Idea 15240

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

Full Idea

The only sure way of distinguishing lawful and accidental universal statements is to point out that in the former cases we see why the regularity must hold, while in the latter case we do not.

Gist of Idea

In lawful universal statements (unlike accidental ones) we see why the regularity holds

Source

Harré,R./Madden,E.H. (Causal Powers [1975], 2.II)

Book Reference

Harré,R/Madden,E.H.: 'Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity' [Blackwell 1975], p.37


A Reaction

I agree with this, and also take it to be the solution to the problem of induction. That smoking causes cancer will be a true generalisation but not a law, until we see clearly why it happens.

Related Idea

Idea 16942 It is hard to see how regularities could be explained [Quine]