Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Laws of Nature, philosophy: laws of nature (physical laws) are descriptions of dependencies of physical quantities among each other. From the fact that these are descriptions, it follows that these are no regulations in the sense of e.g. legal regulations. N. Goodman suggests in “Fact, Fiction and Forecast” (1954) that natural laws should be formulated in the form of irreal conditional sentences (also known as counterfactual conditionals); If A were the case, B would have been the case.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
Hempel I 98ff
Law of Nature/Wittgenstein: because they cannot be verified completely, they are not statements but only instructions for the formation of statements.
II 99
Laws of Nature/causal necessity/Wittgenstein: the laws of nature are not outside the phenomena - they belong to the language and to our description of things - when ones discusses them, one cannot ignore how they manifest themselves physically.
IV 109
Law of Nature/explanation/Tractatus/Wittgenstein: 6,371 laws of nature are not explanations of natural phenomena - Tractatus 6,372 So they stay with the laws of nature, like the older with God.
II 131
Justification/laws of nature/Wittgenstein: laws of nature can be justified, rules of grammar not.
II 163
Law of Nature/law/Wittgenstein: 2. Law of Thermodynamics/Wittgenstein: it is not clear a priori that the world continues to lose its order over time. It is a matter of experience.
II 164
However, it is not a matter of experience, that it must come to an equal distribution of nuts and raisins, if one whirls them. That something happens with necessity, there is no experience. That one presupposes another > force to explain the separation. (For example, specific weight).
Laws of nature/Hertz/Wittgenstein: Hertz has said where something does not comply with his laws, there must be invisible masses, to explain it.
WittgensteinVsHertz: this statement is neither right nor wrong, but it can be practical or not.
Hypotheses like talking of "invisible masses" and "unconscious mental events" are standards of the expression.
Laws of Nature/Wittgenstein: we believe it has to do with a law of nature a priori while it is a standard of expression:
E.g. So like saying "Actually, everyone is going to Paris,
II 165
Although some do not arrive, but all their displacements are preparations for the trip to Paris."
IV 105
Law of Causality/Law of Nature/Tractatus: 632 the law of causality is not a law but the form of a law.
IV 108
Causality/form/show/say/Tractatus: 636 if there were a law of causality, it might be: "There are laws of nature". But one cannot say that, it turns out.
Tetens VII 122
Civilization/WittgensteinVsCivilization/WittgensteinVsModernity/Tetens: believes he can explain everything and thinks all important is explained once the facts are scientifically explained in principle.
It is an illusion that the world is explained when we know the laws of nature.
VII 123
Definition laws of nature/Tractatus/Tetens: are the truth functions of elementary propositions. Therefore, the world as a whole cannot be explained. Neither through logic nor through the laws of nature. The laws of nature also not explain natural phenomena. (> Tractatus 6.317).
VII 124
The laws of nature are also not the last. That is the logical space, the space of all possible distributions of truth values to the elementary propositions.

L. Wittgenstein
Vorlesungen 1930-35 Frankfurt 1989

L. Wittgenstein
Das Blaue Buch - Eine Philosophische Betrachtung Frankfurt 1984

L. Wittgenstein
Tractatus Logico Philosophicus Frankfurt/M 1960

Te I
H. Tetens
Geist, Gehirn, Maschine Stuttgart 1994

H. Tetens
Tractatus - Ein Kommentar Stuttgart 2009

> Counter arguments against Wittgenstein

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-26