Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Second-order relations and nomic regularities

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Bird’s Ultimate Argument sought to show that Armstrong’s N relationships involving categorical universals can’t entail nomic regularities. In N’s place Bird offered the non-categorical SR relation. Two kinds of objection have been raised: either Bird’s own alternative metaphysics fails in just the same way as Armstrong’s or the target of Bird’s argument may anyway have a way out of the problem. My aim is to reclaim the victory for Bird. I argue that the responses in defence of Armstong’s N relationships fail to acknowledge that Bird was explicitly concerned with Armstrong’s commitment to a categoricalist view of universals. Moreover, Bird’s alternative account does not suffer the same problem since his metaphysics of properties is essentialist. Nevertheless, Bird’s account does need elaborating on to explain why SR relationships entail their regularities. I offer Schaffer’s Axiomatic Solution as a candidate for this purpose.

Original languageEnglish
JournalPhilosophical Studies
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2022

Keywords

  • Axiom choice
  • Dispositional essentialism
  • Inference problem
  • Laws
  • Nomic necessitation
  • Second-order relations

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Second-order relations and nomic regularities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this