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 Pragmatic laws allow prediction and explanation, to the extent that reality is stable
1 p.3 Mechanisms can't explain on their own, as their models rest on pragmatic regularities
1 p.3 We can show that regularities and pragmatic laws are more basic than mechanisms
1 n1 p.2 A 'law of nature' is just a regularity, not some entity that causes the regularity
2 p.5 Strict regularities are rarely discovered in life sciences
3 p.7 Mechanisms are ontologically dependent on regularities
3 p.8 Rather than dispositions, functions may be the element that brought a thing into existence
3 p.8 Biological functions are explained by disposition, or by causal role
4 p.16 Generalisations must be invariant to explain anything
5 p.18 Mechanisms must produce macro-level regularities, but that needs micro-level regularities
5 p.22 There is nothing wrong with an infinite regress of mechanisms and regularities