Erkenntnis:1-26 (forthcoming)

Ori Belkind
Tel Aviv University
In this paper I argue that the positivist–conventionalist interpretation of the Restricted Principle of Relativity is flawed, due to the positivists’ own understanding of conventions and their origins. I claim in the paper that, to understand the conventionalist thesis, one has to diambiguate between three types of convention; the linguistic conventions stemming from the fundamental role of mathematical axioms, the conventions stemming from the coordination betweeh theoretical statements and physical, observable facts or entities, and conventions that are made possible by possible revisions to theory. I claim that it is not possible to interpret the Principle of Relativity as based on one of these three types of convention. This renders the conventionalist interpretation of the Principle of Relativity untenable. The paper is part of a larger project that aims to understand the philosophical significance of the Principle of Relativity.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-020-00220-9
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,784
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Testability and Meaning.Rudolf Carnap - 1936 - Philosophy of Science 3 (4):419-471.
Philosophy of Physics: Space and Time.Tim Maudlin - 2012 - Princeton University Press.
The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts.R. Carnap - 1956 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 1 (1):38--76.

View all 28 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Is General Relativity Generally Relativistic?Roger Jones - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 381.
On the Foundation of the Principle of Relativity.Øyvind Grøn & Kjell Vøyenli - 1999 - Foundations of Physics 29 (11):1695-1733.
Conventionalism in Special Relativity.Peter Mittelstaedt - 1977 - Foundations of Physics 7 (7-8):573-583.
Quantum Physics and Philosophical Problems.V. A. Fok - 1971 - Russian Studies in Philosophy 10 (3):252-256.
Conventionalism.Iris Einheuser - 2003 - Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Added to PP index

Total views
11 ( #836,316 of 2,463,146 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #299,108 of 2,463,146 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes