Leibniz on the laws of nature and the best deductive system |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Connecticut, 91 North Eagleville Road, Storrs, CT 06269-3125, USA;2. Institute for Systems Genomics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA;1. Department of Chemical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;2. Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;3. Department of Structural Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA;1. Orthogonal Research, Champaign, IL 61821, USA;2. C.S. Mott Center for Human Growth and Development, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA;3. Embryogenesis Center, Gulf Specimen Marine Laboratory, Panacea, FL 32346, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Many philosophers who do not analyze laws of nature as the axioms and theorems of the best deductive systems nevertheless believe that membership in those systems is evidence for being a law. This raises the question, “If the best systems analysis fails, what explains the fact that being a member of the best systems is evidence for being a law?” In this essay I answer this question on behalf of Leibniz. I argue that although Leibniz’s philosophy of laws is inconsistent with the best systems analysis, his philosophy of nature’s perfection enables him to explain why membership in the best systems is evidence for being a law of nature. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
