Stephen Mumford and Alexander Bird disagree about which properties are powers and, correspondingly, about the extent of the philosophical work to which powers may be put. Unfortunately, there is an important respect in which these authors are talking past each other and so the reason for their disagreement remains obscured. I highlight what has gone wrong in their recent exchange, attempt to clear up the confusion and pinpoint the true source of their disagreement. My hope is to redirect the efforts of these authors and their followers onto more pressing foundational issues in the metaphysics of powers
This paper argues that the new metaphysics of powers, also known as dispositional essentialism or ca...
The paper aims to elucidate in better detail than before the dispute about whether or not dispositio...
According to the grounding theory of powers, fundamental physical properties should be thought of as...
Stephen Mumford and Alexander Bird disagree about which properties are powers and, correspondingly, ...
Do powers have powers? More urgently, do powers need further powers to do what powers do? Stathis Ps...
George Molnar came to see that the solution to a number of the prob-lems of contemporary philosophy ...
This paper argues that the new metaphysics of powers, also known as dispositional essentialism or ca...
This paper defends an account of the laws of nature in terms of irreducibly modal properties (aka po...
This chapter explores a potential analogy between mereological principles and laws of nature. Agains...
Is it metaphysically possible for a world to contain power properties but no nonpower properties? Re...
Do conceivability arguments work against physicalism if properties are causal powers? By considerin...
Some philosophers have suggested that having powers in one’s ontology has the advantage of providing...
This paper analyses and criticizes the idea that powers are representable as vectors. Mumford and An...
As we understand them, dispositions are relatively uncontroversial 'predicatory' properties had by o...
Powers ontologies are currently enjoying a resurgence. This would be dispiriting news for the modern...
This paper argues that the new metaphysics of powers, also known as dispositional essentialism or ca...
The paper aims to elucidate in better detail than before the dispute about whether or not dispositio...
According to the grounding theory of powers, fundamental physical properties should be thought of as...
Stephen Mumford and Alexander Bird disagree about which properties are powers and, correspondingly, ...
Do powers have powers? More urgently, do powers need further powers to do what powers do? Stathis Ps...
George Molnar came to see that the solution to a number of the prob-lems of contemporary philosophy ...
This paper argues that the new metaphysics of powers, also known as dispositional essentialism or ca...
This paper defends an account of the laws of nature in terms of irreducibly modal properties (aka po...
This chapter explores a potential analogy between mereological principles and laws of nature. Agains...
Is it metaphysically possible for a world to contain power properties but no nonpower properties? Re...
Do conceivability arguments work against physicalism if properties are causal powers? By considerin...
Some philosophers have suggested that having powers in one’s ontology has the advantage of providing...
This paper analyses and criticizes the idea that powers are representable as vectors. Mumford and An...
As we understand them, dispositions are relatively uncontroversial 'predicatory' properties had by o...
Powers ontologies are currently enjoying a resurgence. This would be dispiriting news for the modern...
This paper argues that the new metaphysics of powers, also known as dispositional essentialism or ca...
The paper aims to elucidate in better detail than before the dispute about whether or not dispositio...
According to the grounding theory of powers, fundamental physical properties should be thought of as...