Laws of Nature: Necessary and Contingent.

This paper shows how a niche account of the metaphysics of laws of nature and physical properties—the Powers-BSA —can underpin both a sense in which the laws are metaphysically necessary and a sense in which it is true that the laws could have been different. The ability to reconcile entrenched disagreement should count in favour of a philosophical theory, so this paper constitutes a novel argument for the Powers-BSA by showing how it can reconcile disagreement about the laws' modal status. This paper also constitutes a defence of modal necessitarianism , the interesting and controversial view according to which all worlds are nomologically identical, because it shows how the modal necessitarian can appease the orthodox contingentist about laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]