Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
Javascript must be enabled to continue!
David Armstrong on Functional Laws
View through CrossRef
In his new bookWhat is a Law of Nature?, David Armstrong gives an account of functional laws on the basis of the theory, originally proposed independently by Armstrong himself, Dretske, and Tooley, and further developed in this work, which asserts that laws are relations of necessitation between properties. On the theory, properties and relations are universals, and so a law is a relation between universals and is itself a universal. There are two reasons why Armstrong's account of functional laws is worth discussing. First, any theory that purports to be about laws that are investigated by science–I assume that we are only interested in such theories–must cover functional laws and not merely be adequate for generalizations about ravens or grue. Second, Armstrong claims that the main rival to his theory, the regularity theory of laws, cannot give a satisfactory account of functional laws (p. 22 and p. 37, all references toWhat is a Law of Nature?unless otherwise stated). If this is true, and if Armstrong's theory can provide a satisfactory account of functional laws, then this may incline us towards his point of view.
Title: David Armstrong on Functional Laws
Description:
In his new bookWhat is a Law of Nature?, David Armstrong gives an account of functional laws on the basis of the theory, originally proposed independently by Armstrong himself, Dretske, and Tooley, and further developed in this work, which asserts that laws are relations of necessitation between properties.
On the theory, properties and relations are universals, and so a law is a relation between universals and is itself a universal.
There are two reasons why Armstrong's account of functional laws is worth discussing.
First, any theory that purports to be about laws that are investigated by science–I assume that we are only interested in such theories–must cover functional laws and not merely be adequate for generalizations about ravens or grue.
Second, Armstrong claims that the main rival to his theory, the regularity theory of laws, cannot give a satisfactory account of functional laws (p.
22 and p.
37, all references toWhat is a Law of Nature?unless otherwise stated).
If this is true, and if Armstrong's theory can provide a satisfactory account of functional laws, then this may incline us towards his point of view.
Related Results
“Joe Oliver Is Still King” (1950)
“Joe Oliver Is Still King” (1950)
Abstract
Armstrong never tired of recounting his debt to Joe Oliver. In this article, abridged from The Record Changer, he makes the case succinctly. Some biographer...
Louis Armstrong, in His Own Words
Louis Armstrong, in His Own Words
Abstract
Louis Armstrong has been the subject of countless biographies and music histories. Yet scant attention has been paid to the remarkable array of writings he ...
Louis Armstrong’s Lip Problems: Satchmo’s Syndrome Reviewed
Louis Armstrong’s Lip Problems: Satchmo’s Syndrome Reviewed
Rupture of the orbicularis muscle of the lips in wind musicians is known as Satchmo’s syndrome because it is assumed that Louis Armstrong (nicknamed Satchmo) suffered this conditio...
The “Goffin Notebooks” (CA. 1944)
The “Goffin Notebooks” (CA. 1944)
Abstract
Armstrong organizes the Goffin notebooks by year, covering the period 1918-1931, but within each section he ranges somewhat freely outside of the designated...
Nordic Laws
Nordic Laws
By the end of the Viking Age, the Nordic region was divided between three kingdoms, all of which still exist in the early twenty-first century, albeit with very different borders, ...
“Louis Armstrong + The Jewish Family In New Orleans, La., The Year Of 1907” (March 31, 1969-1970)
“Louis Armstrong + The Jewish Family In New Orleans, La., The Year Of 1907” (March 31, 1969-1970)
Abstract
Armstrong refers to this extraordinary document as a “book,” clearly signaling his desire that it be published. He began writing it while recovering from a ...
“Lombardo Grooves Louis!” (1949)
“Lombardo Grooves Louis!” (1949)
Abstract
As Metronome’s introductory paragraph for this story explains, Armstrong was given a “blindfold test” by Leonard Feather, in which he was asked to identify ...
“Bunk Didn’t Teach Me”
“Bunk Didn’t Teach Me”
Abstract
Bunk Johnson sprang unexpectedly from obscurity in 1939, when scholars began to take a keen interest in the early New Orleanian period. Johnson made many cl...