# Do Laws Of Nature Exist?

I mean, this sounds strange, but I thought about pragmatism yester
day. While I'm not a pragmatist, I think pragmatism is an interest
ing and very useful way of thinking.

Pragmatism is basically a thinking that everything is determined b
y its USES (or EFFECTS).

For example,
[Chair] = [What we use to sit].
[Bed] = [What we use to sleep].

The most important thing is that those are equals, not inclusions.
So if no one use a chair to sit, that's not actually a chair. And
if someone use a table to sleep, then that's also a bed too.

Similarily, A god exists if and only if there is a believer. The g
od changes the believer's behaviors and the behaviors are real (or
PRACTICAL). So the god is a cause of real effects. Therefore the g
od is real.

Similarily, a law of nature is real in this sense. It is a cause o
f real effects.

Thus pragmatism is an idealism. Uses are ideas, not materials. Thi
s gave me an insight, "We can't be practical with materials only".

So when I thought about materialism after that, I got a question o
f "How can materialists accept laws of nature?". Since laws of nat
ure are not material, if they accept they would be dualists (who a
ccept both material and mental things).

After searching, I found that modern "materialism" accepts that la
ws of nature exist in addition to matter, force, energy and even t
he curvature of the time-space. Since calling it "materialism" no
more makes sense, they call it "naturalism" now. Or "Scientific na
turalism" lol.

But how about Santa Claus? He's not a natural being, but he makes
practical effects on behaviors of people.

Would they explain him as a result of mental activities which are
results of physical events, to explain it as physical events affec
ting other physical events?

I don't know, this list (starting from laws of nature and Santa Cl
aus) will not end. How about structures? Do they exist? And this s
eems very absurd like epicycles of geocentrism to me.

So long story short, I think if you are a materialist, you should
deny laws of nature. Only scientific laws which are just statistic
approximations would be "useful", since you can't say that those "
exist". And the nature is not governed by any rules.

...Or you can rethink of your materialist position instead.