If laws just are regularities (Lewis, Earman), reformulating equiprobability in terms of governing laws collapses back into structure-description approaches, making the proposed revision circular.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
(His work on conditional probability is being referenced here)
An influential 20th-century philosopher who developed important theories about possibility, probability, and how we talk about hypothetical situations.
Regularities(the predictable patterns in nature being compared across worlds)
Patterns that repeat consistently, like the sun rising every day or water boiling at a certain temperature.
Structure-description approaches(the type of approach the statement says the revision collapses back into)
Philosophical methods that explain laws by describing the basic building blocks and patterns of how things are arranged, rather than appealing to governing rules.
laws of nature(Dispute between Ellis and Lowe over the modal status of laws)
Regularities grounded either in essential facts about natural kinds (Ellis) or in the contingent possession of properties by kinds (Lowe)