Derivative Properties in Fundamental Laws
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8399416 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Townsen Hicks (0000-0002-1304-5668, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, corresponding author), Jonathan Schaffer (0009-0003-6340-8353) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 411-450 |
| Publication date | 2017-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0882 • E-ISSN: 1464-3537 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/bjps/axv039 |
| OpenAlex | W2345431948 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 17 |
| References cited | 32 |
Orthodoxy has it that only metaphysically elite properties can be invoked in scientifically elite laws. We argue that this claim does not fit scientific practice. An examination of candidate scientifically elite laws like Newton’s F = ma reveals properties invoked that are irreversibly defined and thus metaphysically non-elite by the lights of the surrounding theory: Newtonian acceleration is irreversibly defined as the second derivative of position, and Newtonian resultant force is irreversibly defined as the sum of the component forces. We think that scientists are happy to invoke metaphysically non-elite properties in scientifically elite laws for reasons of convenience, such as to simplify the equations and to make them more modular. On this basis, we draw a deflationary moral about laws themselves, as being merely convenient summaries. 1. Introduction2. Orthodoxy 2.1. Orthodoxy stated2.2. Orthodoxy explained2.3. A worrisome commitment: Term objectivism3. The Loose View 3.1. The argument from practice3.2. Finding the scientifically elite equations3.3. Diagnosing the metaphysically non-elite properties3.4. Situating our challenge4. Newtonian Mechanics 4.1. Newtonian acceleration4.2. Newtonian resultant force4.3. A metaphysical discovery?5. Objections 5.1. Metaphysically elite after all?5.2. Scientifically non-elite after all?5.3. But our world is not Newtonian!6. Consequences 6.1. Consequences for the motivations for link6.2. Consequences for metaphysically elite properties6.3. Consequences for lawhood
Argument (complex analysis) · Classical mechanics · Elite · Epistemology · Metaphysics · Newtonian dynamics · Orthodoxy · Physics · Political science · Politics · Chemistry · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
What Everyone Should Say about Symmetries (and How Humeans Get to Say It)
Fundamental Nomic Vagueness
Who Shouldn’t Reduce Time’s Arrow
Humean nomic essentialism
Naturalness by law
There is no measurement problem for Humeans
Joints and basic ways
The Power to Govern
Dasgupta's Detonation
Introduction
The strong arm of the law
Artifactual normativity
Interpretation and equivalence; or, equivalence and interpretation
Tractability and laws
Does the Best System Need the Past Hypothesis
Geometry, Fields, and Spacetime
Non-Humeantheories of natural necessity
Universals and scientific realism
How the Laws of Physics Lie
Laws and Symmetry
Nature's Metaphysics
A better best system account of lawhood
The “Structure” of Physics
Humean Supervenience
The Nature of Laws
Putnam's paradox
New work for a theory of universals
Writing the Book of the World
Determinism and Chance
The equivalence myth of quantum mechanics—part II
The equivalence myth of quantum mechanics —Part I
Laws of Nature
Monism
The Non-Governing Conception of Laws of Nature
Deterministic Chance
The World as One of a Kind
| Unique citing works | 17 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,43 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2025 (7) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 15 |