Scientific realism, the atomic theory, and the catch-all hypothesis: Can we test fundamental theories against all serious alternatives?
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (2):253-269 (2009)
|Abstract||Sherri Roush () and I (, ) have each argued independently that the most significant challenge to scientific realism arises from our inability to consider the full range of serious alternatives to a given hypothesis we seek to test, but we diverge significantly concerning the range of cases in which this problem becomes acute. Here I argue against Roush's further suggestion that the atomic hypothesis represents a case in which scientific ingenuity has enabled us to overcome the problem, showing how her general strategy is undermined by evidence I have already offered in support of what I have called the 'problem of unconceived alternatives'. I then go on to show why her strategy will not generally (if ever) allow us to formulate and test exhaustive spaces of hypotheses in cases of fundamental scientific theorizing|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
P. D. Magnus (2010). Inductions, Red Herrings, and the Best Explanation for the Mixed Record of Science. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):803-819.
Jerrold L. Aronson (1989). Testing for Convergent Realism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 40 (2):255-259.
Tetsuji Iseda (1999). Use-Novelty, Severity, and a Systematic Neglect of Relevant Alternatives. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):413.
Michael Devitt (2011). Are Unconceived Alternatives a Problem for Scientific Realism? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 42 (2):285-293.
Anjan Chakravartty (2008). What You Don't Know Can't Hurt You: Realism and the Unconceived. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 137 (1):149 - 158.
P. Kyle Stanford (2006). Exceeding Our Grasp: Science, History, and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. Oxford University Press.
P. Kyle Stanford (2006). Darwin's Pangenesis and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (1).
P. K. Stanford (2006). Darwin's Pangenesis and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (1):121-144.
P. Kyle Stanford (2006). Francis Galton's Theory of Inheritance and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. Biology and Philosophy 21 (4):523-536.
Added to index2009-05-20
Total downloads62 ( #15,090 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?