Dispositions and the principle of least action revisited

Analysis 75 (3):386-395 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Some time ago, Joel Katzav and Brian Ellis debated the compatibility of dispositional essentialism with the principle of least action. Surprisingly, very little has been said on the matter since, even by the most naturalistically inclined metaphysicians. Here, we revisit the Katzav–Ellis arguments of 2004–05. We outline the two problems for the dispositionalist identified Katzav in his 2004 , and claim they are not as problematic for the dispositional essentialist at it first seems – but not for the reasons espoused by Ellis
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SMADAT-2
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Laws in Nature.Mumford, Stephen

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-06-25

Total views
187 ( #15,302 of 39,588 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #18,847 of 39,588 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.