tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post4332311903103074955..comments2024-03-27T20:37:09.185-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: Humeans should be (Kenneth-)PearceansAlexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-73970417213436047842020-04-08T18:33:49.479-05:002020-04-08T18:33:49.479-05:00A lot depends here on how broadly we're unders...A lot depends here on how broadly we're understanding 'Humeanism'. If all we mean is Humeanism (i.e., descriptivism) about causation, then I think the Humean can endorse my view, and can also endorse optimalism, and should endorse one or the other of these views for precisely the reason you give. But I employ a lot of anti-Humean deep metaphysics (most notably: grounding). So if we're thinking of the Humean program more broadly (not just about causation), then your second thoughts are pretty clearly correct. You're going to need some anti-Humean machinery <i>somewhere</i> in order for there to be any kind of 'extra-systematic' explanation of anything. After all (as Hume emphasizes in the <i>Dialogues</i>) in order for God to explain anything in Hume's framework there would need to be observed regularities about divine action.Kenny Pearcehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05561248709234656660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-7156270542535981922020-04-06T09:12:17.513-05:002020-04-06T09:12:17.513-05:00On reflection, I was wrong. The Humean can't t...On reflection, I was wrong. The Humean can't take the Pearcean way out, either, for exactly the same reason that the Humean cannot take the Optimalist way out. The problem with Optimalism is that it required a large dollop of non-analytic non-mathematical necessity, and so does theism (since theism only helps with the problem if it is *necessary* that God exists).Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-69616324551521163462020-04-06T09:09:44.952-05:002020-04-06T09:09:44.952-05:00Atno:
On a Humean story, the only way the aliens ...Atno:<br /><br />On a Humean story, the only way the aliens could enact laws would be by making use of meta-lawlike regularities. But the problem of induction comes back at the level of possible multiverses with different meta-lawlike regularities. Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-79378675617996203112020-04-03T15:02:45.548-05:002020-04-03T15:02:45.548-05:00Unless the aliens create such a large number of or...Unless the aliens create such a large number of orderly universes to the point where standard observers shouldn't be surprised they aren't in a chaotic world. <br /><br />That makes the hypothesis weirder and more complex, though.Atnohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138424784532839636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-21245426326505387322020-04-03T15:00:48.107-05:002020-04-03T15:00:48.107-05:00An alternative would be non-theistic design. Maybe...An alternative would be non-theistic design. Maybe 1) there is a multiverse, 2) with a sufficiently advanced alien civilization that has the power to form bubble universes and select for good laws.<br /><br />1 is required to avoid regress ("how could alien civilizations exist?"), and 2 avoids problems with entropy/Boltzmann galaxies for us, that is, why our universe is orderly throughout, instead of just being life-permitting. <br /><br />(It is a weird hypothesis, however. And I'm not sure it avoids all the problems with entropy and (in this case) inductive chaos. If there are enough universes for there to be an alien civilization, presumably there should be many Boltzmann universes and universes with inductive chaos. So assuming we are standard observers we might still face problems)Atnohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138424784532839636noreply@blogger.com