The Ultimate Argument Against Dispositional Monist Accounts of Laws

Analysis 72 (4):714-722 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Bird argues that Armstrong’s necessitarian conception of physical modality and laws of nature generates a vicious regress with respect to necessitation. We show that precisely the same regress afflicts Bird’s dispositional-monist theory, and indeed, related views, such as that of Mumford & Anjum. We argue that dispositional monism is basically Armstrongian necessitarianism modified to allow for a thesis about property identity

Author Profiles

Stephen Barker
Nottingham University
Benjamin Smart
University of Johannesburg

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-10-07

Downloads
902 (#20,659)

6 months
123 (#38,662)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?