Are There Experimental Arguments Independent of Theories? In Defense of a Hackingian Approach to the Scientific Realism Debate

IF 0.7 2区哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE International Studies in the Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2023-12-27 DOI:10.1080/02698595.2023.2294465

Ruey-Lin Chen

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper defends a Hackingian approach to the scientific realism debate by arguing against mainstream realists’ and antirealists’ common claim that no experimental arguments for the reality of po...

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

有独立于理论的实验论证吗？为科学现实主义辩论中的哈金方法辩护

本文通过论证主流现实主义者和反现实主义者的共同主张，即没有任何实验论据可以证明诗歌的真实性，从而为科学现实主义辩论中的哈金方法辩护。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

International Studies in the Philosophy of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： International Studies in the Philosophy of Science is a scholarly journal dedicated to publishing original research in philosophy of science and in philosophically informed history and sociology of science. Its scope includes the foundations and methodology of the natural, social, and human sciences, philosophical implications of particular scientific theories, and broader philosophical reflection on science. The editors invite contributions not only from philosophers, historians, and sociologists of science, but also from researchers in the sciences. The journal publishes articles from a wide variety of countries and philosophical traditions.

期刊最新文献

Tightrope-Walking Rationality in Action: Feyerabendian Insights for the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics Natural Selection, Mechanism and Phenomenon Are the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) Applicable in Determining the Optimal Fit and Simplicity of Mechanistic Models? Reviewers Acknowledgement Defending a Realist Stance