Structural realism versus standard scientific realism: The case of phlogiston and dephlogisticated air
|Abstract||The aim of this paper is to revisit the phlogiston theory to see what can be learned from it about the relationship between scientific realism, approximate truth and successful reference. It is argued that phlogiston theory did to some extent correctly describe the causal or nomological structure of the world, and that some of its central terms can be regarded as referring. However, it is concluded that the issue of whether or not theoretical terms successfully refer is not the key to formulating the appropriate form of scientific realism in response to arguments from theory change, and that the case of phlogiston theory is shown to be readily accommodated by ontic structural realism.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jeffrey Ketland (2004). Empirical Adequacy and Ramsification. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):287-300.
Otávio Bueno (2008). Structural Realism, Scientific Change, and Partial Structures. Studia Logica 89 (2):213 - 235.
James W. McAllister (1993). Scientific Realism and the Criteria for Theory-Choice. Erkenntnis 38 (2):203 - 222.
Daniel McArthur (2006). Recent Debates Over Structural Realism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 37 (2):209 - 224.
Gerhard Schurz (2011). Structural Correspondence, Indirect Reference, and Partial Truth: Phlogiston Theory and Newtonian Mechanics. Synthese 180 (2):103-120.
Christina McLeish (2005). Scientific Realism Bit by Bit: Part I. Kitcher on Reference. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (4):668--686.
Gerhard Schurz (2009). When Empirical Success Implies Theoretical Reference: A Structural Correspondence Theorem. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (1):101-133.
Added to index2009-05-29
Total downloads211 ( #1,139 of 551,007 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #6,931 of 551,007 )
How can I increase my downloads?