Abstract
It is shown that the validity of Ludwig Boltzmann’s statistical approach to thermodynamical asymmetry depends on the metaphysical standpoints concerning time. Price advocates one metaphysical standpoint that denies the direction of time itself, the denial leads to a difficulty in explaining the thermodynamical asymmetry. In the case of Price’s strategy, the direction of the law does not warrant as much explanation as does the constraint condition on the past, which does not work. In contrast, our study advocates the other metaphysical standpoint. Our strategy suggests that the constraint condition on the past does not warrant as much explanation as does the direction of the law. These findings are exactly opposite to those of Price.
