green numbers give full details.
|
back to list of philosophers
|
expand these ideas
Ideas of Bert Leuridan, by Text
[Belgian, fl. 2010, At the University of Ghent.]
2010
|
Can Mechanisms Replace Laws of Nature?
|
§1
|
p.2
|
14382
|
Pragmatic laws allow prediction and explanation, to the extent that reality is stable
|
§1
|
p.3
|
12787
|
Mechanisms can't explain on their own, as their models rest on pragmatic regularities
|
§1
|
p.3
|
14384
|
We can show that regularities and pragmatic laws are more basic than mechanisms
|
§1 n1
|
p.2
|
14383
|
A 'law of nature' is just a regularity, not some entity that causes the regularity
|
§2
|
p.5
|
14385
|
Strict regularities are rarely discovered in life sciences
|
§3
|
p.7
|
14386
|
Mechanisms are ontologically dependent on regularities
|
§3
|
p.8
|
14387
|
Rather than dispositions, functions may be the element that brought a thing into existence
|
§3
|
p.8
|
12789
|
Biological functions are explained by disposition, or by causal role
|
§4
|
p.16
|
12790
|
Generalisations must be invariant to explain anything
|
§5
|
p.18
|
14388
|
Mechanisms must produce macro-level regularities, but that needs micro-level regularities
|
§5
|
p.22
|
14389
|
There is nothing wrong with an infinite regress of mechanisms and regularities
|