Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


International Journal for Ontology and Metaphysics

Managing Editor: Koridze, Georg

Ed. by Hüntelmann, Rafael / Meixner, Uwe / Tegtmeier, Erwin

Together with Cumpa, Javier

Editorial Board: Addis, Laird / Davies, Brian / Hochberg, Herbert / Johansson, Ingvar / Kanzian, Christian / Klima, Gyula / Koons, Robert C / Künne, Wolfgang / Löffler, Winfried / Mulligan, Kevin / Nef, Frederic / Oaklander, Nathan / Oderberg, David / Orilia, Francesco / Plantinga, Alvin / Potrc, Matjaz / Rapp, Christof / Reicher-Marek, Maria Elisabeth / Schantz, Richard / Scholz, Oliver / Seibt, Johanna / Simons, Peter / Smith, Barry / Stoecker, Ralf / Strobach, Niko / Trettin, Käthe / Wachter, Daniel

2 Issues per year

CiteScore 2016: 0.12

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.111
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.530

See all formats and pricing
More options …

The “Constant” Threat to the Dispositional Essentialist Conception of Laws

Vassilios Livanios
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Philosophy and History of Science, University of Athens, Xanthou 62, 16674 Glyfada, Greece
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2014-02-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mp-2014-0009


According to the dispositional essentialist account of laws of nature, the latter express the dispositional nature of fundamental natural properties. In this paper I discuss the difficulty that the existence of fundamental constants of nature raises for that account. To this end, I examine a relevant argument against the account and describe how an advocate of the dispositionalist conception may try to undermine it by raising objections to its premises. Then I discuss those objections and show that eventually all fail. I finally conclude that the existence of the fundamental constants remains a “constant” threat to the dispositional essentialist conception of laws.

Keywords: fundamental constants; dispositional essentialist conception of laws; inflation theory; multiverse


  • Adams, F. 2008. “Stars in Other Universes: Stellar Structure with Different Fundamental Constants.” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 08:0810.Google Scholar

  • Armstrong, D. M. 1997. A World of States of Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Barrow, J. 2002. The Constants of Nature: From Alpha to Omega-the Numbers That Encode the Deepest Secrets of the Universe. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

  • Barrow, J., and F. Tipler. 1986. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

  • Bird, A. 2002. “On Whether Some Laws Are Necessary.” Analysis 62.3:257–70.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bird, A. 2007. Nature’s Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

  • Bird, A. 2012. “Monistic Dispositional Essentialism.” In Properties, Powers and Structures, edited by A. Bird, B. Ellis, and H. Sankey, 35–41. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Carr, B. (ed.).2007. Universe or Multiverse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cohen-Tannoutji, G. 2009. “Universal Constants, Standard Models and Fundamental Metrology.” European Physical Journal (Special Topics) 172:5–24.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Duff, M. J. 2004. “Comment on the Time-Variation of Fundamental Constants.” arXiv:hep-th/0208093v3 (11 July 2004).Google Scholar

  • Duff, M. J., L. B. Okun, and G. Veneziano. 2002. “Trialogue on the Number of Fundamental Constants.” Journal of High Energy Physics 03(2002):023. Also in arXiv:physics/0110060v2 [physics.class-ph] (28 Feb 2002).CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ellis, G. F. R. 1979. “The Homogeneity of the Universe.” General Relativity and Gravitation 11(4):281–9.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ellis, B. 2005. “Katzav on the Limitations of Dispositionalism.” Analysis 65(1):90–2.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Guth, A. 1981. “Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problem.” Physical Review D 23:347–56.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Harnik, R., G. Kribs, and G. Perez. 2006. “A Universe without Weak Interaction.” Physical Review D 74(3):035006.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Katzav, J. 2004. “Dispositions and the Principle of Least Action.” Analysis 64(3):206–14.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Levy-Leblond, J. M. 1979. “The Importance of Being (a) Constant.” In Problems in the Foundations of Physics, edited by G. Torraldi, 237. Enrico Fermi School LXXII, Amsterdam: North-Holland Publ.Google Scholar

  • Linde, A. D. 1986. “Eternally Existing Self-Reproducing Chaotic Inflationary Universe.” Physics Letters B 175(4):395–400.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Livanios, V. 2008. “Bird and the Dispositional Essentialist Account of Spatiotemporal Relations.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 39(2):383–94.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Livanios, V. 2010. “Symmetries, Dispositions and Essences.” Philosophical Studies 148(2):295–305.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Martin, C. B. 2008. The Mind in Nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

  • Misner, C., K. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler. 1973. Gravitation. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar

  • Moffat, J. W. 2002. “Comment on the Variation of Fundamental Constants.” arXiv: hep-th/0208109v2 (7 Nov 2002).Google Scholar

  • Rees, M. 1999. Just Six Numbers. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

  • Smolin, L. 1997. The Life of the Cosmos. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Smolin, L. 2006. The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science and What Comes Next. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar

  • Stenger, V. 2004. “Is the Universe Fine-Tuned for Us?” In Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism, edited by M. Young and T. Edis, 172–84. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar

  • Tegmark, M., A. Aguirre, M. J. Rees, and F. Wilczek. 2006. “Dimensionless Constants, Cosmology, and Other Dark Matters.” Physical Review D 73(2):023505.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Uzan, J. P. 2002. “The Fundamental Constants and Their Variation: Observational Status and Theoretical Motivations.” Reviews of Modern Physics 75(2):403–55. Also in arXiv:hep-ph/0205340v1(30 May 2002).Google Scholar

  • Uzan, J. P., and B. Leclercq. 2008. The Natural Laws of the Universe: Understanding Fundamental Constants. Chichester, UK: Praxis Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Vilenkin, A. 1983. “Birth of Inflationary Universes.” Physical Review D 27:2848–55.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Weinberg, S. 1992. Dreams of a Final Theory. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

  • Weinberg, S., H. B. Nielsen, and J. G. Taylor. 1983. “Overview of Theoretical Prospects for Understanding the Values of Fundamental Constants.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 310:249–52.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wheeler, J. A. 1974. “Beyond the End of Time.” In Black Holes, Gravitational Waves and Cosmology, edited by M. Rees, R. Ruffini, and A. J. Wheeler. New York: Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar

  • Wilczek, F. 2007. “Fundamental Constants.” arXiv: 0708.4361v1 [hep-ph] (31 Aug 2007).Google Scholar

  • Zwiebach, B. 2009. A First Course in String Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2014-02-01

Published in Print: 2014-04-01

Citation Information: Metaphysica, Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages 129–155, ISSN (Online) 1874-6373, ISSN (Print) 1437-2053, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mp-2014-0009.

Export Citation

©2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin / Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in