Why the ultimate argument for scientific realism ultimately fails |
| |
| Authors: | Moti Mizrahi |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Departamento de Física, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina;2. Science of Advanced Materials, Central Michigan University, MI, United States;3. Department of Physics, Central Michigan University, MI, United States;1. Department of Chemistry, The Catholic University of Korea, Bucheon 420-743, Republic of Korea;2. Department of Chemistry, Inha University, Incheon 402-751, Republic of Korea;1. Physics Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551, USA;2. Physics Department, UC Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA;3. Nuclear Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | In this paper, I argue that the ultimate argument for Scientific Realism, also known as the No-Miracles Argument (NMA), ultimately fails as an abductive defence of Epistemic Scientific Realism (ESR), where (ESR) is the thesis that successful theories of mature sciences are approximately true. The NMA is supposed to be an Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) that purports to explain the success of science. However, the explanation offered as the best explanation for success, namely (ESR), fails to yield independently testable predictions that alternative explanations for success do not yield. If this is correct, then there seems to be no good reason to prefer (ESR) over alternative explanations for success. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
