What Not to Multiply Without Necessity

@article{Schaffer2015WhatNT,
  title={What Not to Multiply Without Necessity},
  author={Jonathan Schaffer},
  journal={Australasian Journal of Philosophy},
  year={2015},
  volume={93},
  pages={644 - 664}
}
  • J. Schaffer
  • Published 2 October 2015
  • Computer Science
  • Australasian Journal of Philosophy
The Razor commands us not to multiply entities without necessity. I argue for an alternative principle—The Laser—which commands us not to multiply fundamental entities without necessity. 
There is no reason to replace the Razor with the Laser
In recent times it has become common to encounter philosophers who recommend the replacement of one principle concerning theory choice, Ockham’s Razor, with another: the Laser. Whilst the Razor tells
Reply to Audi, Bliss, Rosen, Schaffer, and Wang
ABSTRACT I reply to five critics of my book. In particular, I tackle criticisms of my treatment of causation, relative fundamentality, and generativity. I also take on the question of my reliance on
Why Ockham’s Razor should be preferred to the Laser
Ockham’s Razor advises us to not multiply entities (or kinds of entities) without necessity. Recently, Jonathan Schaffer and Karen Bennett have argued that we ought to replace Ockham’s Razor with the
About Presumptions of Physics
There are many essential presumptions in modern physics without sufficient reasoning untested by scientific processes. Some of them are presupposed for consistency of a particular theory. Some
We Need Non-factive Metaphysical Explanation
Suppose that A explains B. Do A and B need to be true? Provided that we have metaphysical explanation in mind, orthodoxy answers “yes:” metaphysical explanation is factive. This article introduces
The Simplicity of Metaphysical Structures
Discussions about metaphysical simplicity typically address ontological parsimony—the number of entities (or kinds of entities) that theories posit. This emphasis, while understandable for
Do Not Revise Ockham's Razor Without Necessity
Ockham’s razor asks that we not multiply entities beyond necessity. The razor is a powerful methodological tool, enabling us to articulate reasons for preferring one theory to another. There are
A new cosmological argument from grounding
This paper presents a new cosmological argument based on considerations about grounding. I argue that, by assuming three plausible principles about grounding, we can construct a cosmological argument
Sums and Grounding
ABSTRACT As I will use the term, an object is a mereological sum of some things just in case those things compose it simply in virtue of existing. In the first half of this paper, I argue that there
Laws and their instances
I present an argument for the view that laws ground their instances. I then outline two important consequences that follow if we accept the conclusion of this argument. First, the claim that laws
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 42 REFERENCES
Against simplicity
Sometimes metaphysicians appeal to simplicity as a reason to prefer one metaphysical theory to another, especially when a philosophical dispute has otherwise reached a state of equilibrium. In this
Grounding in the image of causation
Grounding is often glossed as metaphysical causation, yet no current theory of grounding looks remotely like a plausible treatment of causation. I propose to take the analogy between grounding and
II—L. A. Paul: Categorical Priority and Categorical Collapse
I explore some of the ways that assumptions about the nature of substance shape metaphysical debates about the structure of Reality. Assumptions about the priority of substance play a role in an
From nihilism to monism
Mereological nihilism is the view that all concrete objects are simple. Existence monism is the view that the only concrete object is one big simple: the world. I will argue that nihilism culminates
How to have a radically minimal ontology
In this paper I further elucidate and defend a metaontological position that allows you to have a minimal ontology without embracing an error-theory of ordinary talk. On this view ‘there are Fs’ can
Parts Of Classes
Taking classes apart the trouble with classes a framework for set theory set theory for mereologists.
Quantitative Parsimony
  • Daniel Nolan
  • The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
  • 1997
In this paper, I motivate the view that quantitative parsimony is a theoretical virtue: that is, we should be concerned not only to minimize the number of kinds of entities postulated by our theories
The Identity of Indiscernibles
The principle of the identity of indiscernibles would seem, in the forms in which it is usually stated, to be at best contingently true. It does not appear that even Leibniz held it to be logically
When is parsimony a virtue
Parsimony is a virtue of empirical theories. Is it also a virtue of philosophical theories? I review four contemporary accounts of the virtue of parsimony in empirical theorizing, and consider how
Monism: The Priority of the Whole
Consider a circle and a pair of its semicircles. Which is prior, the whole or its parts? Are the semicircles dependent abstractions from their whole, or is the circle a derivative construction from
...
1
2
3
4
5
...