Abstract
During the last decade new developments in theoretical and speculative cosmology have reopened the old discussion of cosmology's scientific status and the more general question of the demarcation between science and non-science. The multiverse hypothesis, in particular, is central to this discussion and controversial because it seems to disagree with methodological and epistemic standards traditionally accepted in the physical sciences. But what are these standards and how sacrosanct are they? Does anthropic multiverse cosmology rest on evaluation criteria that conflict with and go beyond those ordinarily accepted, so that it constitutes an “epistemic shift” in fundamental physics? The paper offers a brief characterization of the modern multiverse and also refers to a few earlier attempts to introduce epistemic shifts in the science of the universe. It further discusses the several meanings of testability, addresses the question of falsifiability as a sine qua non for a theory being scientific, and briefly compares the situation in cosmology with the one in systematic biology. Multiverse theory is not generally falsifiable, which has led to proposals from some physicists to overrule not only Popperian standards but also other evaluation criteria of a philosophical nature. However, this is hardly possible and nor is it possible to get rid of explicit philosophical considerations in some other aspects of cosmological research, however advanced it becomes.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsb.2012.12.001
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,342
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Mathematical Universe.Max Tegmark - 2008 - Foundations of Physics 38 (2):101-150.
Multiverses and Cosmology.W. R. Stoeger, G. F. R. Ellis & U. Kirchner - forthcoming - Philosophical Issues.
Falsificationism Falsified.Sven Ove Hansson - 2006 - Foundations of Science 11 (3):275-286.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

On Probability and Cosmology: Inference Beyond Data?Martin Sahlen - 2017 - In K. Chamcham, J. Silk, J. D. Barrow & S. Saunders (eds.), The Philosophy of Cosmology. Cambridge, UK:
Lines of Descent: Kuhn and Beyond.Friedel Weinert - 2014 - Foundations of Science 19 (4):331-352.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Testability and Epistemic Shifts in Modern Cosmology.Helge Kragh - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46:48-56.
Some Epistemic Questions of Cosmology.Petar V. Grujić - 2007 - Foundations of Science 12 (1):39-83.
Predictability Crisis in Early Universe Cosmology.Chris Smeenk - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (1):122-133.
The Peculiar Status of Cosmology As a Science.Jan Such - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 5:73-80.
Granice fizyki w kosmologii.Leszek M. Sokołowski - 2015 - Zagadnienia Filozoficzne W Nauce 59:25-81.
Theism and Physical Cosmology.Hans Halvorson - 2010 - In Charles Taliaferro, Victoria Harrison & Stewart Goetz (eds.), Routledge Companion to Theism.
On the Philosophy of Cosmology.George Francis Rayner Ellis - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (1):5-23.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-01-27

Total views
35 ( #271,983 of 2,326,053 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #286,727 of 2,326,053 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes