[PhilPhys] Change of schedule

[Mauro Dorato]

As Nino Zanghì has just cancelled his participation
the workshop has been so rescheduled:


3 November AULA VERRA, Via Ostiense 234, 9.00



9.30 10.30



Laws and Necessities: On the Ineffective Reasonableness of Mathematics

(Robert Di Salle, Philosophy UWO)



Newton's Principia advanced the idea of a world governed by strict
mathematical law. Hume's admiration for Newton's laws did not prevent him
from advancing his well-known skeptical argument against the idea of
necessary connections in nature. But Newton himself anticipated some of
Hume's skeptical concerns. I will show how, in facing those concerns,
Newton took a far-sighted view of the power and the limitations of
mathematical laws, and the subtle relations between natural powers and our
mathematical pictures of them. Along the way, he articulated what it means
to take a realist perspective on laws that are probably wrong.



10:30-11.00 Coffee break



11:00-12:00 Paolo Pecere (Philosophy, Roma 3)

"Forces, Laws and Grounds: Kant's Newtonianism and the limits of cognition"



I will present and analyse connections between Kant's philosophical account
of Newtonian physics and his theory of knowledge. I will show, on the one
hand, that Kant does not merely provide a "foundation" of Newton's physics,
but rather thinks that scientific knowledge necessarily requires a
"metaphysical" element – indeed, this metaphysical part of science even
leads to a partial correction of Newton's original insights. On the other
hand, I will argue that this framework involves an intrinsic limitation of
scientific knowledge, and human cognition in general, as it is summarized
in the "Logic" and in different passages of the Critical works. This is a
further step of Kant's deep and original engagement with Newtonianism as a
philosophical alternative to Rationalism.



12:00-13:00



What Breathes Fire into the Equations? (Barry Loewer, Philosophy, Rutgers)


13.30 Discussion


Since the 17th century discovering the fundamental laws of nature has been
the primary goal of fundamental physics. While it is the task of scientists
to discover what laws there are, it is the task of philosophers to
explain *what
laws are*. In Stephen Hawking’s words the philosophical question is “What
breathes fire into the equations?” In recent metaphysics there is a debate
tween Humean and non-Humean answers to Hawking’s question. In the course of
dealing with some serious objections to Lewis’ account I sketch an
alternative, “the Package Deal Account” (PDA). The PDA transcends the
dispute between Humean and non-Humean accounts in a manner that may strike
one as a kind of Kantian compromise. In my talk after some table setting I
explain and defend the PDA of laws






-- 
Mauro Dorato
Professor of Philosophy of Science
Department of Philosophy, Communication and Media Studies, room 220
Università degli Studi Roma Tre, Via Ostiense 234, 00146 Rome, Italy, tel
+39 0657338354, fax +39 06 57.33.83.40
http://www.filcospe.it/index.php/persone/docenti/67-docenti/mdorato/442-curriculum-vitae-dorato
Quaedam ergo nos magis torquent quam debent, quaedam ante torquent quam
debent, quaedam torquent cum omnino non debeant (Seneca, Liber II, Epistula
XIII); Quaeris' inquit 'quid profecerim? amicus esse mihi coepi.' Multum
profecit: numquam erit solus. Scito esse hunc amicum omnibus. (liber 1,
epistula 6;  "Humanas actiones non ridere, non lugere, neque detestari, sed
intelligere" (Spinoza)
http://filosofiacomunicazionespettacolo.uniroma3.it/mdorato/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listbox.elte.hu/mailman/private/philphys/attachments/20181126/9c9af3da/attachment.html>