laws of nature, central dilemma, necessity, causation, motion in substance.

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD in Philosophy of Religion, Assistant Professor of Institute for Science and Technology Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor of Philosophy of Science Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

This paper proposes a distinct realist perspective on the laws of nature, rooted in the tradition of late Islamic philosophy, which may offer a new solution to one of the difficult challenges of scientific realism, termed the ‘Central Dilemma’ by Mumford. It begins with a brief introduction to the problem of scientific realism concerning the concept of the laws of nature. Then, in the first part, we compare the realist theories of the laws of nature developed by Lewis, Armstrong, and Bird, focusing on their account of the three key concepts of causation, necessity, and law. Based on this analysis, the second part formulates a new realist theory, drawing from the doctrine of “Motion in Substance” from Late Islamic Philosophy, particularly the philosophical thought of Tabatabai. This will be done by extending the idea of motion in substance and examining some of its implications. This new account is, in some respects, similar to Bird’s view, yet in other respects Humean and similar to Lewis’s. By comparing this new approach with the aforementioned three theories, concerning their accounts of causation, necessity, and law in relation to the ‘Central Dilemma’ challenge, we conclude that it could bring a new vision that could potentially resolve this challenge.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
Armstrong, D. M. (1982). Laws of nature as relations between universals, and as universals. Philosophical Topics, 13(1), 7–24.
Armstrong, D. M. (1985). What is a law of nature? Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, D. M. (1989). A combinatorial theory of possibility. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=5PCSZhPqO0EC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=A+Combinatorial+Theory+of+Possibility&ots=g7A64Bx9bM&sig=nwtUrFMWRnRgOxuW1TIpUQh_Lm0.
Armstrong, D. M. (1993). The identification problem and the inference problem. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53(2), 421–422. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2107779
Armstrong, D. M. (2004). Combinatorialism revisited. In La structure du mond: objets, propriétés, états et choses. https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1021183.
Beebee, H. (2000). The non-governing conception of laws of nature. Philosophical and Phenomenological Research, 61(3), 571–594. https://doi.org/10.2307/2653613.
Bird, A. (2001). Necessarily, salt dissolves in water. Analysis, 61(4), 267–274.
Bird, A. (2005). The dispositionalist conception of laws. Foundations of Science, 10(4), 353–370.
Bird, A. (2009). Nature’s metaphysics: laws and properties. OUP Oxford.
Black, R. (2000). Against quidditism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 78(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048400012349371.
Carroll, J. W. (2016). Laws of nature. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2016). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/laws-of-nature/
El-Rouayheb, K., & Schmidtke, S. (2017). The Oxford handbook of Islamic philosophy. Oxford University Press.
French, S. (2006). Looking for laws. Metascience, 15(3), 437–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11016-006-9043-z.
Ghins, M. (2024). Scientific realism and laws of nature: a metaphysics of causal powers (Vol. 483). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54227-5.
Lewis, D. (1986a). On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lewis, D. (1986b). Philosophical papers: volume II. Oxford University Press.
Loewer, B. (1996). Humean supervenience. Philosophical Topics, 24(1), 101–127.
Mittelstaedt, P., & Weingartner, P. A. (2005). Laws of nature. Springer-Verlag. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783540240792.
Mumford, S. (2004). Laws in nature. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203458426/laws-nature-stephen-mumford.
Nasr, S. H. (1978). An introduction to Islamic cosmological doctrines. Thames and Hudson.
Nasr, S. H. (2013). The Islamic intellectual tradition in Persia. (M. A. R. Aminrazavi, Ed.). Routledge.
Ramsey, F. P. (1990). F. P. Ramsey: philosophical papers. (D. H. Mellor, Ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Rizvi, S., & Bdaiwi, A. (n.d.). Allama Tabaṭabai (d. 1981), Nihayat al-ḥikma. In The Oxford handbook of Islamic philosophy.
Stoljar, D. (2017). Physicalism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2017). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/physicalism/
Tabatabai, S. M. H. (2008a). Usul-i falsafe-yi realism [Principles of the philosophy of realism]. (S. H. Khosroshahi, Ed.). Bustan Ketab. https://noorlib.ir/book/view/5603. [In Persian].
Tabatabai, S. M. H. (2008b). Nihayat-i falsafe (tarjume-yi nihayat al-hikmah) [The utmost of philosophy (The translation of Nihayat al-jikmah)]. (S. H. Khosroshahi, Ed.; M. Tadayon, Trans.). Bustan Ketab. https://noorlib.ir/book/view/13923. [In Persian].
Tabatabai, S. M. H. (2019). The elements of Islamic metaphysics (S. Ali Q. Qarai, Trans.). Islamic College for Advanced Studies Pub.
Weatherson, B. (2016). David Lewis. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/david-lewis/
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/david-lewis/
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Journal of Philosophical Theological Research
Volume 27, Issue 3 - Serial Number 105
September 2025
Pages 41-68

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics