thanks filtherton...so then determinism is of a piece with the assumption that mechanical causation applies across scales?
that seems among the first things that would go out the window when you juxtapose anything like quantum physics to actions that happen within the scale that we as humans percieve/inhabit.
so there's a question of scale.
another problem: projections as to cause lean on assumptions about the general characteristics of the system within which elements circulate. there is a kinda huge body of information out there on complex dynamical systems theories for modelling how life operates: because of the characteristics of these systems, any notion of determinism is inapplicable. instead you have processes that are geared around emergence, coupling of waveforms/oscillators, etc. there is obviously event that follows event, but causal links are really difficult to say much about in a meaningful sense, particularly if your notion of causation is locked into mechanics.
natural law seems like a name given to an observable regularity. so it would be a frame-contingent characterization. within particular types of systems, these regularities are predictable and so functionally are like laws. the frame-contingent status of this claim--that regularity x *is* a "nautral law" is at once obvious and overlooked.
this snippets outline problems, tant pis, let's cut to the question:
why is it that folk want to generate a simple, linear world for themselves?
here are some sentences from wittgenstein's tractatus.
he is most elegant:
Quote:
6.363 The procedure of induction consists in accepting as true the simplest law that can be reconciled with our experience.
6.3631 This procedure has no logical justification, but only a psychological one.
It is clear that there are no grounds for believing that the simplest eventuality will in fact be realized.
|