Repository URL:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/13402
DOI:
10.1086/694086
Author(s):
Niels C.M. Martens
Publisher(s):
University of Chicago Press
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
article description
Comparativism---the view that mass ratios are not grounded in absolute masses---faces a challenge by Baker which suggests that absolute masses are empirically meaningful. Regularity comparativism uses a liberalised version of the Mill-Ramsey-Lewis Best Systems Account to have both the Laws of Newtonian Gravity and the absolute mass scale supervene on a comparativist Humean mosaic as a package deal. I discuss three objections to this view, and conclude that it is untenable. The most severe problem is that once we have reduced away the absolute masses, there is nothing that stops us from also reducing the mass ratios.

This article has 0 Wikipedia mention.