Humean laws and explanation
My primary focus in this paper is on an objection to Humean account of laws and specifically to David Lewis’ “best systems analysis” (BSA). The objection is that the laws according to the BSA (which I call L-laws) fail to account for the ability of laws to explain. In contrast governing laws (which...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
2019-12-01
|
| Series: | Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/70052 |
| _version_ | 1817988863894749184 |
|---|---|
| author | Barry Loewer |
| author_facet | Barry Loewer |
| author_sort | Barry Loewer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | My primary focus in this paper is on an objection to Humean account of laws and specifically to David Lewis’ “best systems analysis” (BSA). The objection is that the laws according to the BSA (which I call L-laws) fail to account for the ability of laws to explain. In contrast governing laws (which I will call G-laws) are alleged to account for the role of laws in scientific explanations by virtue of their governing role. If governing is required for laws to be explanatory then Humean accounts like Lewis’ are dead in the water since explanation is central to the role of laws in the sciences. However, I will argue that there are effective rebuttals to arguments that Humean laws don’t explain and that actually it is governing accounts that have difficulty with explanation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-14T00:39:48Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a3bc1d428b30460481c021ecc36e586b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1414-4247 1808-1711 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-14T00:39:48Z |
| publishDate | 2019-12-01 |
| publisher | Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology |
| spelling | doaj.art-a3bc1d428b30460481c021ecc36e586b2022-12-22T02:22:14ZengUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaPrincipia: An International Journal of Epistemology1414-42471808-17112019-12-0123337338510.5007/1808-1711.2019v23n3p37333883Humean laws and explanationBarry Loewer0Rutgers UniversityMy primary focus in this paper is on an objection to Humean account of laws and specifically to David Lewis’ “best systems analysis” (BSA). The objection is that the laws according to the BSA (which I call L-laws) fail to account for the ability of laws to explain. In contrast governing laws (which I will call G-laws) are alleged to account for the role of laws in scientific explanations by virtue of their governing role. If governing is required for laws to be explanatory then Humean accounts like Lewis’ are dead in the water since explanation is central to the role of laws in the sciences. However, I will argue that there are effective rebuttals to arguments that Humean laws don’t explain and that actually it is governing accounts that have difficulty with explanation.https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/70052laws of naturehumean superveniencebest systems analysisexplanation |
| spellingShingle | Barry Loewer Humean laws and explanation Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology laws of nature humean supervenience best systems analysis explanation |
| title | Humean laws and explanation |
| title_full | Humean laws and explanation |
| title_fullStr | Humean laws and explanation |
| title_full_unstemmed | Humean laws and explanation |
| title_short | Humean laws and explanation |
| title_sort | humean laws and explanation |
| topic | laws of nature humean supervenience best systems analysis explanation |
| url | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/70052 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT barryloewer humeanlawsandexplanation |