Graduate studies at Western
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:122 - 133 (1982)
|Abstract||It is widely assumed that disposition predicates do not designate entities which could be causal factors in the production of natural phenomena. Yet, the fact that an object has a given dispositional property is often taken to help explain behavior exhibited by objects to which the disposition is ascribed. Instrumentalist, realist, and rationalist analyses of disposition predicates embody three quite distinct views of how both assumptions could be correct. It is argued that the instrumentalist fails to capture basic intuitions concerning the explanatory import of disposition ascriptions, the rationalist tries unsuccessfully to locate necessary connections in nature, and the realist provides an account which is intuitively satisfying without introducing otiose entities into the ontology of empirical science.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Randolph Clarke (2010). Opposing Powers. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):153 - 160.
Gerald Doppelt (2005). Empirical Success or Explanatory Success: What Does Current Scientific Realism Need to Explain? Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1076-1087.
Gabriele Contessa (2013). Dispositions and Interferences. Philosophical Studies 165 (2):401-419.
Jennifer Mckltrick (2003). The Bare Metaphysical Possibility of Bare Dispositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):349–369.
Rob Vanderbeeken & Erik Weber (2002). Dispositional Explanations of Behavior. Behavior and Philosophy 30:43 - 59.
Tobias Hansson Wahlberg (2009). 4-D Objects and Disposition Ascriptions. Philosophical Papers 38 (1):35-72.
Lauren Ashwell (2010). Superficial Dispositionalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (4):635-653.
Matthew Tugby (2010). Simultaneity in Dispositional Interaction? Ratio 23 (3):322-338.
Michael Fara, Dispositions. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
William A. Bauer (2010). The Ontology of Pure Dispositions. Dissertation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Mohamed Elsamahi (1994). Could Theoretical Entities Save Realism? In David & Richard Hull & Burian (ed.), PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.
Larry Laudan (1981). A Confutation of Convergent Realism. Philosophy of Science 48 (1):19-49.
A. Bird & T. Handfield (2008). Dispositions, Rules and Finks. Philosophical Studies 140 (2):285-98.
Markus Schrenk (2007). Can Capacities Rescue Us From Ceteris Paribus Laws? In B. Gnassounou & M. Kistler (eds.), Dispositions in Philosophy and Science. Ashgate.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads5 ( #170,097 of 739,318 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,318 )
How can I increase my downloads?