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

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 R. / Seibt, Johanna / Simons, Peter / Smith, Barry / Strobach, Niko / Trettin, Käthe / Wachter, Daniel

CiteScore 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.257
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.369

See all formats and pricing
More options …

Dispositionality and Symmetry Structures

Vassilis Livanios
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Classics and Philosophy, University of Cyprus, Eressou 1 & Kallipoleos, P.O. Box: 20537 1678, Nicosia, Cyprus
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-01-24 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mp-2018-0010


A number of metaphysicians and philosophers of science have raised the issue of the modality of the fundamental structures of the world. Although the debate so far has been largely focused on the (alleged) inherent causal character of fundamental structures, one aspect of it has naturally taken its place as part of the dispositional/categorical debate. In this paper, I focus on the latter in the case of the fundamental symmetry structures. After putting forward the necessary metaphysical presuppositions for the debate to make sense, I offer an argument which undermines the plausibility of a dispositionalist account of fundamental symmetry structures.

Keywords: symmetry; modality; dispositionalism; structural realism; conservation laws


  • Bird, A. 2007. Nature’s Metaphysics: Laws and Properties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Brading, K., and H. Brown 2003. “Symmetries and Noether’s Theorems.” In Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections, edited by K. Brading and E. Castellani, 89–109. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Brading, K., and H. Brown 2004. “Are Gauge Symmetry Transformations Observable?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55:645–665.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brown, H. 1999. “Aspects of Objectivity in Quantum Mechanics.” In From Physics to Philosophy, edited by J. Butterfield and C. Pagonis, 45–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Brown, H., and P. Holland 2004. “Dynamical Vs. Variational Symmetries: Understanding Noether’s First Theorem.” Molecular Physics 102:1133–1139.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brown, H., and R. Sypel 1995. “On the Meaning of the Relativity Principle and Other Symmetries.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9:235–253.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cartwright, N. 1999. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Castellani, E. 2002. “Symmetry, Quantum Mechanics and Beyond.” Foundations of Science 7:181–196.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chakravarrty, A. forthcoming. “Particles, Causation, and the Metaphysics of Structure.” Synthese doi:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ellis, B. 2005. “Katzav on the Limitations of Dispositionalism.” Analysis 65:90–92.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Esfeld, M. 2004. “Quantum Entanglement and the Metaphysics of Relations.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35B:601–617.Google Scholar

  • Esfeld, M. 2009. “The Modal Nature of Structures in Ontic Structural Realism.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):179–194.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Esfeld, M., and V. Lam 2011. “Ontic Structural Realism as a Metaphysics of Objects.” In Scientific Structuralism, edited by P. Bokulich and A. Bokulich, 143–160. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Esfeld, M., and C. Sachse 2011. Conservative Reductionism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • French, S. (2006). Structure as a Weapon of the Realist. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian society, Vol. 106, No. 1, 169–187. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • French, S. 2010. “The Interdependence of Structure, Objects and Dependence.” Synthese 175:89–109.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • French, S. 2014. The Structure of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • French, S. 2016. “Response to My Critics.” Metascience 25:189–196.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • French, S. forthcoming1. “Doing Away with Dispositions: Powers in the Context of Modern Physics.” In Dispositionalism: Perspectives from Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science, edited by A.S. Meincke-Spann. Springer Synthese Library, Cham: Springer.Google Scholar

  • French, S. forthcoming2. “Building Bridges with the Right Tools: Modality and the Standard Model.” In Submission for EPSA 2015 Proceedings. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/12011

  • French, S., and J. Ladyman 2011. “In Defence of Ontic Structural Realism.” In Scientific Structuralism, edited by P. Bokulich and A. Bokulich, 25–42. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Greaves, H., and D. Wallace 2014. “Empirical Consequences of Symmetries.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (1):59–89.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Healey, R. 2009. “Perfect Symmetries.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60:697–720.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Katzav, J. 2004. “Dispositions and the Principle of Least Action.” Analysis 64:206–214.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kosso, P. 2000. “The Empirical Status of Symmetries in Physics.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51:81–98.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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

  • Livanios, V. 2014. “Categorical Structures and the Multiple Realisability Argument.” Methode 3 (4):141–166.Google Scholar

  • Livanios, V. forthcoming. “Hamilton’s Principle and Dispositional Essentialism: Friends or Foes?” Journal for General Philosophy of Science. doi: .CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lyre, H. 2000. “A Generalized Equivalence Principle.” International Journal of Modern Physics D 9 (6):633–647.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lyre, H. 2010. “Humean Perspectives on Structural Realism.” In The Present Situation in the Philosophy of Science, edited by F. Stadler, 381–397. Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Lyre, H. 2012. “Structural Invariants.” In Probabilities, Laws, and Structures, edited by D. Dieks et al., 169–181. Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Martin, C.A. 2002. “Gauge Principles, Gauge Arguments and the Logic of Nature.” Philosophy of Science 69:S221–234.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Martin, C.B. 1997. “On the Need for Properties: The Road to Pythagoreanism and Back.” Synthese 112:193–231.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • McKenzie, K. 2014. “Priority and Particle Physics: Ontic Structural Realism as a Fundamentality Thesis.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (2):353–380.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mertz, D. 1996. Moderate Realism and Its Logic. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

  • Mertz, D. 2003. “An Instance Ontology for Structures: Their Definition, Identity, and Indiscernibility.” Metaphysica 4 (1):121–164.Google Scholar

  • Morrison, M. 1995. “The New Aspect: Symmetries as Meta-Laws - Structural Metaphysics.” In Laws of Nature: Essays on the Philosophical, Scientific and Historical Dimensions (Vol. 8), edited by F. Weinert, 157–188. BerlIn Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • North, J. 2009. “The” Structure” of Physics: A Case Study.” The Journal of Philosophy 106 (2):57–88.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nounou, A. 2015. “For or against Structural Realism? A Verdict from High Energy Physics.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 49:84–101.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Psillos, S. 2009. “The Structure, the Whole Structure and Nothing but the Structure?.” In Knowing the Structure of Nature, 136–146. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

  • Psillos, S. 2012. “Adding Modality to Ontic Structuralism: An Exploration and Critique.” In Structural Realism: Structure, Object and Causality, edited by E. Landry and D. Rickles, 169–185. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Romero-Maltrana, D. 2015. “Symmetries as By-Products of Conserved Quantities.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 52:358–368.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ruetsche, L. 2003. “A Matter of Degree: Putting Unitary Inequivalence to Work.” Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1329–1342.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Saatsi, J. forthcoming. “Structuralism with and without Causation.” Synthese doi:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schmidt, M. 2010. “Causation and Structural Realism.” Organon F 17 (4):508–521.Google Scholar

  • Smart, B., and K. Thebault 2015. “Dispositions and the Principle of Least Action Revisited.” Analysis 75 (3):386–395.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Smith, S.R. 2008. “Symmetries and the Explanation of Conservation Laws in the Light of the Inverse Problem in Lagrangian Mechanics.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (2):325–345.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tooley, M. 1977. “The Nature of Laws.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7:667–698.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vetter, B. 2009. “Review of Bird (2007).” Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 8:320–328.Google Scholar

  • Vetter, B. 2015. Potentiality: From Dispositions to Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Wallace, D. 2006. “In Defence of Naïvete: On the Conceptual Status of Lagrangian Quantum Field Theory.” Synthese 151:33–80.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Weinberg, S. 1995. The Quantum Theory of Fields: Vol.1, Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-01-24

Published in Print: 2018-08-28

Citation Information: Metaphysica, Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 201–217, ISSN (Online) 1874-6373, ISSN (Print) 1437-2053, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mp-2018-0010.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in