Abstract
The current state of the relationship between metaphysics and the philosophy of science might appear to be one best described as ‘hostility on both sides’. In an attempt to bridge this gap, French and McKenzie (Eur J Analytic Philos 8:42–59, 2012) have suggested a twofold strategy: on the one hand, if metaphysics is to be taken to have something direct to say about reality, the implications of physics need to be properly appreciated; on the other, one does not have to agree with the claim that a prioristic metaphysics should be dismissed or even discontinued, since we should value scientifically disinterested metaphysics as a ‘toolbox’ for philosophers of science. It is in the context of this strategy that I want to approach the issue of understanding the symmetry principles that feature in the Standard Model of modern physics. I shall suggest that the dispositional analysis of laws is incapable of accommodating such principles. However, there are other tools in the metaphysical toolbox that one can draw upon to help capture the nature of such symmetries corresponding to the second part of the above strategy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As is now well-known, it was suggested that quarks obey a form of the former, before it was shown that their statistical behaviour could be equally well represented via the introduction of a further parameter that came to be called ‘colour’. The speculation that the choice between applying parastatistics and introducing a new property is in certain respects conventional has been firmed up by Baker et al. 2015. This might be viewed as adding further heft to the Vetterian approach.
- 2.
There is some debate as to whether anyons should be considered mere mathematical artefacts or ‘real’ and possibly manipulable entities. In view of what I shall say below, one might question this distinction.
- 3.
Although if one accepts Baker et al.’s result that there is a certain conventionality that holds between conceiving of quarks as parafermions of order 3 and as possessing colour, then one might suggest that other representations are in fact manifested in this world as well.
- 4.
This obviously also involves shifting the locus of potentiality from objects and their properties to the relevant laws and symmetries, with all the attendant consequences regarding how we should understand possible worlds, counterfactuals, counterlegals etc. I don’t have space to discuss such issues here.
References
Baker, D.J., H. Halvorson, and N. Swanson. 2015. The conventionality of parastatistics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66: 929–976.
Bird, A. 2007. Nature’s metaphysics: Laws and properties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cei, A., and S. French. 2014. Getting away from governance: Laws, symmetries and objects. Méthode – Analytic Perspectives 3. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13135/2281-0498%2F4.
Chakravartty, A. 2013. Realism in the Desert and in the Jungle: Reply to French, Ghins and Psillos. Erkenntnis 178: 39–58.
Cohen, J., and C. Callender. 2009. A better best system account of lawhood. Philosophical Studies 145: 1–34.
French, S. 2000. Putting a new spin on particle identity. In Spin-statistics connection and commutation relations, ed. R. Hilborn and G. Tino, 305–318. Melville: American Institute of Physics.
———. 2014. The structure of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. forthcoming. Doing away with dispositions: Powers in the context of modern physics. In Dispositionalism: Perspectives from metaphysics and the philosophy of science, ed. A.S. Meincke-Spann. Berlin: Springer Synthese Library, Springer.
French, S., and D. Krause. 2006. Identity in physics: A historical, philosophical, and formal analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
French, S., and K. McKenzie. 2012. Thinking outside the (tool)box: Towards a more productive engagement between metaphysics and philosophy of physics. The European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 8: 42–59.
———. 2015. Rethinking outside the toolbox: Reflecting again on the relationship between philosophy of science and metaphysics. In Metaphysics in contemporary physics, Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, ed. T. Bigaj and C. Wuthrich, 145–174. Leiden: Rodopi.
French, S., and J. Saatsi. forthcoming. The explanatory role of symmetries. In: Explanation beyond causation, ed. J. Saatsi and A. Reutlinger. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, N. 2015. Humean reductionism about laws of nature. In A companion to David Lewis, ed. B. Loewer and J. Schaffer. Oxford: Wiley.
Lange, M. 2012. There sweep great general principles which all the laws seem to follow. In Oxford studies in metaphysics, vol. 7, ed. Karen Bennett and Dean Zimmerman, 154–185. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maclaurin, J., and H. Dyke. 2012. What is analytic metaphysics for? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90: 291–306.
Mumford, S. 2011. Causal powers and capacities. In The Oxford handbook of Causation, ed. H. Beebee, P. Menzies, and C. Hitchcock, 265–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Psillos, S. 2006. What do powers do when they are not manifested? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72: 135–156.
Vetter, B. 2009. Review of Bird. Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 8: 320–328.
———. 2014. Dispositions without conditionals. Mind 123: 129–156.
———. 2015. Potentiality: From dispositions to modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
French, S. (2017). Building Bridges with the Right Tools: Modality and the Standard Model. In: Massimi, M., Romeijn, JW., Schurz, G. (eds) EPSA15 Selected Papers. European Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53730-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53730-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-53729-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-53730-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)