The Unalterability of Laws and the Reductionist Strategy

Bernard Berofsky

in Nature's Challenge to Free Will

Published in print January 2012 | ISBN: 9780199640010
Published online May 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780191738197 | DOI:
 						The Unalterability of Laws and the Reductionist Strategy

Show Summary Details


The third premise of the consequence argument claims that laws are unalterable. The possibility that laws of psychology, such as those of decision theory, are not all self-evidently unalterable is raised. The existence of alterable nonlaws that support their corresponding counterfactuals is noted. The argument for unalterability based on conceptual considerations is rejected. The unalterability of laws may follow from the governance theory; but the regularity theory is a possible alternative interpretation. Although Mark Lange rejects the thesis that laws are alterable, his views actually lend support to the possibility that some laws are alterable. Even the thesis that all physical laws are unalterable is open to challenge. If the consequence argument restricts laws to the unalterable basic laws of physics, the argument will fail because laws in other sciences cannot all be reduced to basic physical laws.

Keywords: consequence argument; unalterability; governance theory; regularity theory; psychological laws; decision theory; basic physical laws; Lange

Chapter.  8709 words. 

Subjects: Metaphysics

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.