Scientific Realism and the Stratagema de Divide et Impera
Scientific Realism and the Stratagema de Divide et Impera
复制标题
科学实在论与分而治之的战略
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
T. Lyons
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Lyons
为了应对历史挑战，科学实在论的复杂变体的倡导者强调理论体系可以分为许多组成部分。抛开对系统本身的任何认知承诺，他们认为我们有理由相信关键成功预测中部署的那些特定成分。斯塔西斯·普西洛斯（Stathi Psillos）阐明了一个明确的标准，用于准确辨别哪些理论成分合格。我详细批评了普西洛斯的标准。然后，我根据一组著名的历史案例来测试更普遍的部署现实主义直觉，我认为这些案例的重要性被忽视了。我的结论是，这种复杂的现实主义形式仍然受到引发它的历史论证的威胁。 1. 科学实在论的标准2．评估标准3。回到关键的见解：责任4。一些案例研究 5.评估部署现实主义 科学现实主义的标准 评估标准 回到关键见解：责任 一些案例研究 评估部署现实主义
In response to historical challenges, advocates of a sophisticated variant of scientific realism emphasize that theoretical systems can be divided into numerous constituents. Setting aside any epistemic commitment to the systems themselves, they maintain that we can justifiably believe those specific constituents that are deployed in key successful predictions. Stathis Psillos articulates an explicit criterion for discerning exactly which theoretical constituents qualify. I critique Psillos's criterion in detail. I then test the more general deployment realist intuition against a set of well-known historical cases, whose significance has, I contend, been overlooked. I conclude that this sophisticated form of realism remains threatened by the historical argument that prompted it. 1. A criterion for scientific realism2. Assessing the criterion3. A return to the crucial insight: responsibility4. A few case studies5. Assessing deployment realism A criterion for scientific realism Assessing the criterion A return to the crucial insight: responsibility A few case studies Assessing deployment realism