, Volume 144, Issue 3, pp 397–413 | Cite as

Laws and Lawlessness


I develop a metaphysical position that is both lawless and anti-Humean. The position is called realist lawlessness and contrasts with both Humean lawlessness and nomological realism – the claim that there are laws in nature. While the Humean view also allows no laws, realist lawlessness is not Humean because it accepts some necessary connections in nature between distinct properties. Realism about laws, on the other hand, faces a central dilemma. Either laws govern the behaviour of properties from the outside or from the inside. If the former, an unacceptable quidditist view of properties follows. But no plausible account of laws within properties can be developed that permits a governing role specifically for laws. I conclude in favour of eliminativism about laws. At the conceptual core, the notion of a law in nature is misleading. It is suggestive of an otherwise static world in need of animation.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armstrong, D.M. 1978A Theory of UniversalsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, D.M. 1983What is a Law of Nature?Cambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, D.M. 1997A World of States of AffairsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Armstrong, D. M. 2003

    ‘Truthmakers for Modal Truths’

    Lillehammer, H.Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. eds. Real Metaphysics: Essays in Honour of D. H. MellorRoutledgeLondon1224
    Google Scholar
  5. Armstrong, D. M. (2004, ‘Combinatorialism Revisited’, in J-M. Monnoyer (ed.), La structure du monde, Vrin, Paris (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  6. Armstrong, D.M. 2005‘Four Disputes about Properties’Synthese144309320Google Scholar
  7. Beebee H. (2004). ‘What Holds the World Together?’. Synthese (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  8. Bird, A. 2001‘Necessarily, Salt Dissolves in Water’Analysis.61267274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bird, A. 2002‘On Whether Some Laws are Necessary’Analysis62257270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Black, R. 2000‘Against QuidditismAustralasian Journal of Philosophy7887104Google Scholar
  11. Carroll, J. 1987‘Ontology and the Laws of Nature’Australasian Journal of Philosophy65261276Google Scholar
  12. Carroll, J. 1994Laws of NatureCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Cartwright, N. 1993‘In Defence of “This Worldly” Causality: Comments on van Fraassen’s Laws and Symmetry’Philosophy and Phenomenological Research53423429Google Scholar
  14. Cartwright, N. 1993a

    ‘Aristotelian Natures and the Modern Experimental Method’

    Earman, J. eds. Inference, Explanation and Other Philosophical FrustrationsUniversity of California PressLos Angeles4471
    Google Scholar
  15. Descartes, R. 1644, Principia Philosophiae, in J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff and D. Murdoch (trans.), ‘Principles of Philosophy’, The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Vol. I, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985, pp. 177–291.Google Scholar
  16. Dretske, F. 1977‘Laws of Nature’Philosophy of Science44248268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dupré, J. 1993The Disorder of ThingsHarvard University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Earman, J. 1993‘In Defense of Laws: Reflections on Bas van Fraassen’s Laws and Symmetry’Philosophy and Phenomenological Research53413419Google Scholar
  19. Ellis, B. 2001Scientific EssentialismCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Ellis, B. 2002The Philosophy of Nature: A Guide to the New EssentialismAcumenCheshamGoogle Scholar
  21. Giere, R. 1995

    ‘The Sceptical Perspective: Science without Laws of Nature’

    Weinert, F. eds. Laws of Nature: Essays on the Philosophical, Scientific and Historical Dimensionsde GruyterBerlin120138
    Google Scholar
  22. Giere, R. 1999Science Without LawsUniversity of Chicago PressChicagoGoogle Scholar
  23. Honderich, T. eds. 1995The Oxford Dictionary of PhilosophyOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Ladyman, J 2004

    ‘The Epistemology of Constructive Empiricism’

    Clark, P.Young, R. eds. Van Fraassen’s Philosophy of ScienceOxford University PressOxfordforthcoming
    Google Scholar
  25. Lange, M. 2000Natural Laws in Scientific PracticeOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewis, D. 1973CounterfactualsBlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewis, D. 1986On The Plurality of WorldsBlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewis, D. 1986Philosophical Papers, IIOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Lewis, D. 1999Papers in Metaphysics and EpistemologyCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Lowe, E. J. (2002, A Survey of Metaphysics, Oxford University Press, Oxford Mellor, D. H.: 1977, ‘Natural Kinds’, in D. H. Mellor, Matters of Metaphysics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991, pp. 123–135.Google Scholar
  31. Mellor, D.H. 1991Matters of MetaphysicsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Mill, J.S. 1843A System of Logic: Ratiocinative and InductiveLongmansLondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Molnar G. (2003). Powers: A Study in Metaphysics, S. Mumford (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  34. Mumford, S. 1998DispositionsOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Mumford, S. (2004, ‘The Nomological Argument’, Synthésè (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  36. Mumford, S. (2004a ‘Filled in Space’, in B. Gnassounou and M. Kistler (eds.), Dispositions et pouvoirs causaux, Vrin, Paris (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  37. Psillos, S. 2002Causation and ExplanationAcumenCheshamGoogle Scholar
  38. Ramsey, F. P. 1928

    ‘Universals of Law and of Fact’

    Mellor, H. eds. Philosophical PapersCambridge University PressCambridge1401441990
    Google Scholar
  39. Ramsey, F. P. 1929

    ‘General Propositions and Causality’

    Mellor, H. eds. Philosophical PapersCambridge University PressCambridge145163
    Google Scholar
  40. Roberts, J. 2005‘Measurability and Laws of Nature’Synthese144433447Google Scholar
  41. Ruby, J. 1986

    ‘The Origins of Scientific “Law”’

    Weinert, F. eds. Laws of Nature: Essays on the Philosophical, Scientific and Historical Dimensionsde GruyterBerlin289315
    Google Scholar
  42. Shoemaker S. (1980). ‘Causality and Properties’, in Identity, Cause, and Mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982Google Scholar
  43. Stevens, P.S. 1974Patterns in NaturePenguinLondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Strawson, G. 1989The Secret Connexion: Causation, Realism and David HumeClarendon PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Swoyer, C. 1982‘The Nature of Natural Laws’Australasian Journal of Philosophy60203223Google Scholar
  46. Tooley M. ‘The Nature of Laws’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7: 667–698.Google Scholar
  47. Fraassen, B. 1989Laws and SymmetryOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  48. 1993, ‘Précis of Laws and Symmetry’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53, 411–412.Google Scholar
  49. Weinert, F. eds. 1995Laws of Nature: Essays on the Philosophical Scientific and Historical Dimensionsde Gruyterde GruyterGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity Park NottinghamU.K

Personalised recommendations