Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 April 2022
Terence Horgan and John Tienson claim that folk psychological laws are different in kind from basic physical laws in at least two ways: first, physical laws do not possess the kind of ceteris paribus qualifications possessed by folk psychological laws, which means the two types of laws have different logical forms; and second, applied physical laws are best thought of as being about an idealized World and folk psychological laws about the actual world. I argue that Horgan and Tienson have not made a persuasive case for either of the preceding views.
I would like to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for financial support during the early stages of the research that lead to this paper. I also thank Ausonio Marras, William Demopoulos, and William Rappaport for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.