• Are the laws of nature irreducible?
    So, you think that electrons (a fermion) and photons (a boson) don't exist? Rather they are merely part of a "conceptual apparatus"?tom

    They exist if a physical theory postulates their existence, and that theory is successful in explaining various empirical phenomena.

    There are two grounds for contending that X exists: X is a subject of direct experience, or X is postulated by a successful explanatory theory. A theory is successful, of course, when it correctly predicts future experience.
  • Are the laws of nature irreducible?
    This is an attempt to get a coherent concept of the laws of nature. What are they? What are they made of? How do they work?Querius

    The main thing to keep in mind when pondering such questions is that physical laws are not features of the universe (nor are fermions, bosons, etc.). They are features of the conceptual apparatus we've invented to explain the universe.
  • The Role of Government
    What is/are the common roles and functions of all national governments? What are the responsibilities of all governments?TopHatProductions115

    I assume this is a philosophical question ("What are the legitimate or ethically defensible functions of government?"), not an empirical one ("What functions do the various governments in the world exercise?").

    If the former is intended, then there are three:

    1. Protect the rights of its citizens (from the depredations of common criminals and foreign invaders);

    2. Supply various public goods (a "public good" in economics is a good which is non-rivalrous and non-excludable, and therefore cannot be supplied by private providers); and

    3. Manage natural commons (such as the atmosphere, public lands, and major bodies of water).

    The only feature of government that distinguishes it from other human associations and institutions is its presumed power to legitimately use force to achieve its aims. Hence, the criterion for deciding what government functions are defensible is given by the answer to the question, "For what purposes, and in what circumstances, is the use of force by one moral agent against another morally defensible"?