Constructing “Objects”

Laws and the use of induction to establish laws don’t require objects. The reasons for thinking this are analyzed and refuted. Next, the role of the principle of indiscernibles and Leibniz’s law in our projection of objects onto the world are given. This role is due to the fact that we characterize objects in functional ways, in terms of relations and properties we single out. Puzzles about the apparent modal properties of distinct objects that are otherwise categorically the same (statues and the clay they’re made of that come to be and are destroyed at the same time) arise because of these practices. These are explained and dissolved. The apparent role of objects in explanations is described; it’s shown that inferences to worldly objects don’t provide genuine explanations.