Cited by 961Philosophy and Theoretical SciencePhilosophy and History of ScienceEpistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics

Nature's Metaphysics

Bird, Alexander·2007·Oxford University Press eBooks

Abstract

Abstract What are the laws of nature, and what explains their existence? This book develops the proposal that the laws of nature are grounded in the essences of properties. It is argued that fundamental natural properties have dispositional essences — they are potencies (pure powers). After explaining this proposal, the book goes on to show how this accounts for the existence of the laws of nature. A distinctive feature of this account is that it ensures that the laws of nature are metaphysically necessary. This account has advantages over the regularity and nomic necessitation accounts associated with Lewis and Armstrong, while the dispositional essentialist view of properties has corresponding advantages over the categoricalist view of properties, according to which properties are quidditistic and do not have qualitative essences, merely primitive identity and difference. The relationship between potencies and modality, and also intentionality is explored. Other potential criticisms are raised and the view defended against them. For example it is claimed that if all properties are potencies, then a vicious regress ensues; it is shown that this does not follow. Geometrical and other ‘structural’ properties are raised as counterexamples, being properties that seem categorical; it is argued that this is the case only if one takes a particular view of the role of spacetime in physical theories. It is held that laws are metaphysically contingent whereas dispositional essentialism makes them necessary; it is argued that the contingency of laws is an illusion. An account of laws is developed in the face of Mumford's claim that neither dispositional essentialism nor science has need of laws.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199227013.001.0001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bird (2007) lists four problems for accounts that analyze laws in terms of dispositions: fundamental constants, conservation laws and symmetry principles, principles of least action, and multiple laws relating distinct properties.

    “Bird (2007) lists four problems (p.211): (1) fundamental constants, (2) conservation laws and symmetry principles, (3) principles of least action, and (4) multiple laws relating distinct properties.”
  • Property-based theories such as dispositionalism and natural kind essentialism struggle to explain sophisticated regularities or laws, including conservation laws, retention laws, functional laws, idealized laws, and lawlike boundary conditions such as the Past Hypothesis.

    “it has been argued: that dispositionalists and natural kind essentialists struggle to explain conservation laws; 23 that dispositionalists struggle to explain retention laws (namely, the regularity that things are disposed to retain their dispositions over time in the absence of interferences); 24 and that all property-based accounts struggle to explain functional laws, 25 idealized laws, 26 and”

    From The nomological argument for the existence of God (2022) · cites this paper as Bird (2007, 213-214)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bird, A.
Corresponding author
Bird, Alexander
Venue
Oxford University Press eBooks
Published
2007-06-01
OpenAlex
W2504615297
Cited by
961
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 149 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 25
FWCI
15.87
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Funders
Arts and Humanities Research Council (AH/D503833/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Keywords
laws of nature, metaphysics of law, dispositional essentialism, potency, dispositional properties, categorical properties, regularity theory, metaphysical necessity, modality, intentionality, structural properties, spacetime, Lewis Mumford, Lewis, Armstrong

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review