e44e635bdc The contention here is that the world investigated by the sciences—as distinct from “the world in itself” (assuming this to be a coherent distinction)—is in some sense dependent on the ideas one brings to scientific investigation, which may include, for example, theoretical assumptions and perceptual training; this proposal is detailed further in section 4. R., 1982, ‘The Miracle of Science’, Philosophical Quarterly, 32: 232–244. & C. Zalta (ed.), URL = . The epistemological dimension of realism, though shared by realists generally, is sometimes described more specifically in contrary ways. Kloesel, & the Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1956: Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantic and Modal Logic, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. For example, Fine (1996/1986, chs. Laudan, L., 1981, ‘A Confutation of Convergent Realism’, Philosophy of Science, 48: 19–48. 111, 121, 150), but Kuhn (2000, p.
Hacking, I., 1982, ‘Experimentation and Scientific Realism’, Philosophical Topics, 13: 71–87. There is a weak implication here to the effect that if science aims at truth and scientific practice is at all successful, the characterization of scientific realism in terms of aim may then entail some form of characterization in terms of achievement. 143) notes, one may simply end up with ‘the best of a bad lot’. Schaffer, 1985, Leviathan and the Air Pump, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Given that the theories differ precisely in what they say about the unobservable (their observable consequences—the data—are all shared), a challenge to realism emerges: the choice of which theory to believe is underdetermined by the data. (For other responses, see Leplin 1981, McAllister 1993, Chakravartty 2007, ch. Antirealism: Foils for Scientific Realism 4.1 Empiricism 4.2 Historicism 4.3 Social Constructivism 4.4 Feminist Approaches 4.5 Pragmatism, Quietism, and Dialectical Paralysis Bibliography Academic Tools Other Internet Resources Related Entries .
Faerosa replied
373 weeks ago