Vikings or Normans? The Radicalism of Naturalized Metaphysics

  • 1 School of Economics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa; Center for Economic Analysis of Risk, Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Don Ross


The paper investigates the extent to which naturalized metaphysics, as proposed and characterized by Ladyman and Ross (2007. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford: Oxford University Press) among others, suggests a radical break with the conceptual space of pre-naturalized metaphysics. The investigation compares Ladyman and Ross’s methodology for metaphysics with that recently advocated by Steven French (2014. The Structure of the World: Metaphysics and Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press). The comparison promises to be revealing because French shares Ladyman and Ross’s commitment to build a new metaphysics on the basis of a particular thesis developed in the philosophy of science literature, ontic structural realism (OSR). Thus differences between Ladyman and Ross’s and French’s approaches to metaphysics can be exhibited cleanly, without having to be pried apart from different respective views about the ontology implied by scientific theory and practice.

  • Batterman, R. 2002. The Devil in the Details. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

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

  • Brown, R., and J. Ladyman. 2009: “Physicalism, Supervenience and the Fundamental Level.” Philosophical Quarterly 59:20–38.

  • Chakravartty, A. 2007. A Metaphysics for Scientific Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Dennett, D. 1991. “Real Patterns.” Journal of Philosophy 88:27–51.

  • Dupré, J. 1993. The Disorder of Things. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Fine, A. 1984. “The Natural Ontological Attitude.” In Scientific Realism, edited by J. Leplin, 83–107. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Fine, A. 1986. The Shaky Game. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • French, S. 2014. The Structure of the World: Metaphysics and Representation. 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.” European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 8:42–59.

  • Ladyman, J., and K. Robertson. 2013. “Landauer Defended: A Reply to Norton.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44:263–261.

  • Ladyman, J., and D. Ross. 2007. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Ladyman, J., and D. Ross. 2013. “The World in the Data.” In Scientific Metaphysics, edited by D. Ross, J. Ladyman and H. Kincaid, 108–50. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Lange, M. 2009. Laws and Lawmakers: Science, Metaphysics and the Laws of Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Maudlin, T. 2007. The Metaphysics within Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Pearl, J. 2009. Causality, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • van Fraassen, B. 2002. The Empirical Stance. New Haven: Yale University Press.

  • Woodward, J. 2003. Making Things Happen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Zahar, E. 2007. Why Science Needs Metaphysics: A Plea for Structural Realism. Chicago: Open Court.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.

Journal + Issues

Metaphysica provides an international forum of ontology and metaphysics for readers all over the world. The journal is published biannually.