Single Idea 16247

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

Full Idea

Laws are ontologically primitives at least in that two worlds could differ in their laws but not in any observable respect. ….[21] I take content of the laws to be expressed by equations.

Gist of Idea

Laws are primitive, so two indiscernible worlds could have the same laws

Source

Tim Maudlin (The Metaphysics within Physics [2007], 1.4)

Book Reference

Maudlin,Tim: 'The Metaphysics within Physics' [OUP 2007], p.17


A Reaction

At least that spells out his view fairly dramatically, but I am baffled as to what he thinks a law could be. He is arguing against the Lewis regularity-axioms view, and the Armstrong universal-relations view. He ignores the essentialist view.

Related Idea

Idea 16246 Rather than take necessitation between universals as primitive, just make laws primitive [Maudlin on Armstrong]