Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The laws of nature are those generalisations in the collection of truths that best satisfy the three measures of strength, simplicity, and fit.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The criteria of strength, simplicity, and fit are language-relative, varying with how predicates like 'grue' are defined (Goodman's problem).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If simplicity is not objective but framework-dependent, the 'best system' lacks a determinate winner across all conceptual schemes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Laws of nature must be objective features of reality, not artifacts of which linguistic framework we happen to prefer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Necessitarian accounts (Armstrong, Dretske, Tooley) hold that laws involve genuine nomic necessity between universals, not mere regularities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A Humean best-system law that is accidentally true cannot distinguish between genuine laws and cosmic coincidences sharing the same axiomatic role.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The best-system account therefore fails to capture the modal force that grounds counterfactual support, which is a defining feature of lawhood.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Collections of truths can be ranked by three measures: strength, simplicity, and fit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A collection of truths has better fit if it entails that what actually happens had a higher chance of happening at earlier times.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The best systematic account of truths is the one that optimises across all three measures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.