The argument's P2 assumes a completed, self-standing physical ontology, but structural-causal physics leaves intrinsic natures open — an assumption Bertrand Russell's 1927 Analysis of Matter explicitly challenged.

?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.

Analysis of Matter(in philosophy of science and metaphysics): A 1927 book by Russell that explores what physical matter actually is and whether our scientific understanding reveals the true nature of physical things.
Bertrand Russell: Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher, logician, and social activist (1872-1970) who became famous for trying to show that mathematics could be built from pure logic, and for his clear, witty writing that made complex ideas accessible to everyday readers. He also became a public intellectual who spoke out on major issues like nuclear weapons, religion, and social justice, earning the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950. Today, he's remembered as one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century who believed philosophy should tackle real-world problems, not just abstract puzzles.
Intrinsic natures(as what Fine claims can make relational truths true): The essential qualities or characteristics that belong to something by itself, independent of how it relates to other things.
Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake)

Based on where you are in your exploration