SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy / 2017 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1

Farklı Doğa Yasaları Görüşleri Üzerine

Different Views of Laws of Nature

ÖMER FATİH TEKİN
Pages
43–63
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In the section of nomic necessitation we have been scrutinised the arguments put forward by David Armstrong and finally the last section; it has been discussed Alexander Bird's views of dispositional essentialism comparing with the other two aspects.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There are roughly two main understanding in philosophy of science: Epistemology of Science and Metaphysics of Science.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Let's think outside the box, there are three significant views about laws of nature; Regularity Theory, Necessitation Theory and Dispositional Essential views.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the section of nomic necessitation we have been scrutinised the arguments put forward by David Armstrong and finally the last section; it has been discussed Alexander Bird's views of dispositional essentialism comparing with the other two aspects.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

There are roughly two main understanding in philosophy of science: Epistemology of Science and Metaphysics of Science. It is examined that some concept such as Laws of Nature, Causation, Time and Space into the metaphysics of Science. In this paper, it has been studied laws of nature which is one the most important subjects in metaphysics of science. Let's think outside the box, there are three significant views about laws of nature; Regularity Theory, Necessitation Theory and Dispositional Essential views. It has been worked the views of David Lewis in regularity theory. In the section of nomic necessitation we have been scrutinised the arguments put forward by David Armstrong and finally the last section; it has been discussed Alexander Bird's views of dispositional essentialism comparing with the other two aspects.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEKİN, Ö. F. (2017). Farklı Doğa Yasaları Görüşleri Üzerine. Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1, 43–63. https://ajindex.com/articles/150944

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Armstrong, D. (1983). What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Bird, A. (1998). Philosophy of Science. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  3. Bird, A. (2004). Antidotes All The Way Down?.Theoria, 19. 259-269.
  4. Bird, A. (2005). The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws. Foundations of Science, 10: 353-370.
  5. Bird, A. (2007). Nature's Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  6. Ellis, B. & Lierse, C. (1994). Dispositional Essentialism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 72: 27-45.
  7. Hume, D. (2007). A Treatise of Human Nature (ed. D. F. Norton & M. J. Norton). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  8. Hume, D. (2000). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (ed. T. L. Beauchamp). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  9. Lewis, D. (1973).
  10. Counterfactuals. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing. Lewis, D. (1999). Papers in Metaphysics and Epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Psillos, S. (2002). Causation and Explanation. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  12. Tooley, M. (1977). The Nature of Laws. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 7: 667-698.
  13. Van Fraassen, B. C. (1989). Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/david-lewis/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dispositions/
  14. Yılmaz, M. (2004). Simone de Beauvoir. Felsefe Ansiklopedisi, 2 (ed. A. Cevizci). İstanbul: Etik Yayınları, 214-223