Graduate studies at Western
Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S13-S24 (2001)
|Abstract||This paper examines in detail two paths that lead to Structural Realism (SR), viz. a substantive philosophical position which asserts that only the structure of the world is knowable. The upward path is any attempt to begin with empiricist premises and reach a sustainable realist position. (It has been advocated by Russell, Weyl, and Maxwell among others.) The downward path is any attempt to start from realist premises and construct a weaker realist position. (It has been recently advocated by Worrall, French, and Ladyman.) This paper unravels and criticizes the metaphysical presuppositions of both paths to SR. It questions its very possibility as a substantive-and viable-realist thesis|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Ioannis Votsis (2005). The Upward Path to Structural Realism. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1361-1372.
Daniel McArthur (2006). Recent Debates Over Structural Realism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 37 (2):209 - 224.
Ioannis Votsis, The Epistemological Status of Scientific Theories: An Investigation of the Structural Realist Account.
Michael Esfeld & Vincent Lam (2006). Moderate Structural Realism About Space-Time. Synthese 160 (1):27 - 46.
Matteo Morganti (2004). On the Preferability of Epistemic Structural Realism. Synthese 142 (1):81--107.
Ioannis Votsis (2002). 1 the Scientific Realism Debate. Philosophy of Science.
Jeffrey Ketland (2004). Empirical Adequacy and Ramsification. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):287-300.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads79 ( #12,227 of 729,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #14,866 of 729,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?