Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Dogma of Necessity: Royce on Nature and Scientific Law

The Dogma of Necessity: Royce on Nature and Scientific Law The Dogma of Necessity: Royce on Nature and Scientific Law mich a el futch University of Tulsa t h e phil osophic a l r a mific at ions of modern science—physical, bio- logical, and formal and mathematical—g fi ure centrally in Royce’s philosophy. Even the most cursory of glances at his corpus reveals a systematic and deep engagement with many of the leading developments in nineteenth-century science, from the nebular hypothesis, or evolution in both its Darwinian and Spencerian forms, to the work of Cantor and Dedekind. It would perhaps not be going too far to suggest that, from his first to last writings, the devel- opment of Royce’s philosophy is in no small measure driven by an attempt to come to terms with these developments. And yet, while this has received some attention from the scholarly community, it remains an underemphasized facet of his thought. In this paper, I want to begin to redress this deficiency by focusing on but one small part of Royce’s philosophy of nature, namely, his views on scientific laws. In particular, I will look at what Royce dubs the “Dogma of Necessity,” the ways in which this dogma differs from his own http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Pluralist University of Illinois Press

The Dogma of Necessity: Royce on Nature and Scientific Law

The Pluralist , Volume 7 – Mar 2, 2012

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-illinois-press/the-dogma-of-necessity-royce-on-nature-and-scientific-law-I8iMMFvAYY
Publisher
University of Illinois Press
ISSN
1944-6489

Abstract

The Dogma of Necessity: Royce on Nature and Scientific Law mich a el futch University of Tulsa t h e phil osophic a l r a mific at ions of modern science—physical, bio- logical, and formal and mathematical—g fi ure centrally in Royce’s philosophy. Even the most cursory of glances at his corpus reveals a systematic and deep engagement with many of the leading developments in nineteenth-century science, from the nebular hypothesis, or evolution in both its Darwinian and Spencerian forms, to the work of Cantor and Dedekind. It would perhaps not be going too far to suggest that, from his first to last writings, the devel- opment of Royce’s philosophy is in no small measure driven by an attempt to come to terms with these developments. And yet, while this has received some attention from the scholarly community, it remains an underemphasized facet of his thought. In this paper, I want to begin to redress this deficiency by focusing on but one small part of Royce’s philosophy of nature, namely, his views on scientific laws. In particular, I will look at what Royce dubs the “Dogma of Necessity,” the ways in which this dogma differs from his own

Journal

The PluralistUniversity of Illinois Press

Published: Mar 2, 2012

There are no references for this article.