RELATIVE AND OBJECTIVE, ON BALANCE: Detailing the Best Systems Analysis of Laws

dc.contributor.advisorLyon, Aidanen_US
dc.contributor.advisorRomeijn, Jan-Willemen_US
dc.contributor.authorBialek, Maxen_US
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.contributor.publisherDigital Repository at the University of Marylanden_US
dc.contributor.publisherUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md.)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-14T05:42:11Z
dc.date.available2017-09-14T05:42:11Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.description.abstractVariations on Lewis’ Best Systems Analysis (BSA) of laws of nature have tended to emphasize the aspects of the view that allow it to accommodate the peculiarities of scientific practice. That move has allowed such views to do a lot of good work in solving old and new challenges for the BSA, but at the cost of strengthening the argument against the BSA that it is insufficiently objective. I argue that the “insufficiently objective” objection is overcome by a balance of relativity in the laws and limits to that relativity, each properly motivated by appeal to scientific practice. I then explore what relativity in the laws, and limits to it, may be required by scientific practice.en_US
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.13016/M2P55DH3M
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/19957
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledPhilosophyen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledPhilosophy of scienceen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledlaws of natureen_US
dc.titleRELATIVE AND OBJECTIVE, ON BALANCE: Detailing the Best Systems Analysis of Lawsen_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Bialek_umd_0117E_18338.pdf
Size:
903.18 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format