Synthese 131 (3):291-328 (2002)

In this article I give a naturalistic-cum-formal analysis of the relation between beauty, empirical success, and truth. The analysis is based on the one hand on a hypothetical variant of the so-called 'mere-exposure effect' which has been more or less established in experimental psychology regarding exposure-affect relationships in general and aesthetic appreciation in particular. On the other hand it is based on the formal theory of truthlikeness and truth approximation as presented in my "From Instrumentalism to Constructive Realism". The analysis supports the findings of James McAllister in his beautiful "Beauty and Revolution in Science", by explaining and justifying them. First, scientists are essentially right in regarding aesthetic criteria useful for empirical progress and even for truth approximation, provided they conceive of them as less hard than empirical criteria. Second, the aesthetic criteria of the time, the 'aesthetic canon', may well be based on 'aesthetic induction' regarding nonempirical features of paradigms of successful theories which scientists have come to appreciate as beautiful. Third, aesthetic criteria can play a crucial, schismatic role in scientific revolutions. Since they may well be wrong, they may, in the hands of aesthetic conservatives, retard empirical progress and hence truth approximation, but this does not happen in the hands of aesthetically flexible, 'revolutionary' scientists.
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Epistemology   Logic   Metaphysics   Philosophy of Language
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1016188509393
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,291
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Philosophers Should Prefer Simpler Theories.Darren Bradley - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (12):3049-3067.
Aesthetic Values in Science.Milena Ivanova - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (10):e12433.
Explanation and Explanationism in Science and Metaphysics.Juha Saatsi - forthcoming - In Matthew Slater & Zanja Yudell (eds.), Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science: New Essays. Oxford University Press.
Theism, naturalism, and scientific realism.Jeffrey Koperski - 2017 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 53 (3):152-166.
Recent Work on Aesthetics of Science.James W. McAllister - 2002 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (1):7 – 11.

View all 18 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Why is Beauty a Road to the Truth?Paul Thagard - 2005 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 84 (1):365-370.
The Concept of Truth.Boris Čulina - 2001 - Synthese 126 (1-2):339 - 360.
Introduction.Johan van Benthem, Theo Kuipers & Henk Visser - 2011 - Synthese 179 (2):203-206.
Beauty, a Road to the Truth?David Miller - 2005 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 83 (1):341-355.
Truth and Reference.Richard Schantz - 2001 - Synthese 126 (1):261-281.
Semantic Theory and Necessary Truth.Ian Rumfitt - 2001 - Synthese 126 (1-2):283 - 324.
Truth & Use.Hans Seigfried - 2001 - Synthese 128 (1):1-13.
Post-Tarskian Truth.Jaakko Hintikka - 2001 - Synthese 126 (1):17-36.
Post-Tarskian Truth.Jaakko Hintikka - 2001 - Synthese 126 (1-2):17 - 36.


Added to PP index

Total views
24 ( #457,903 of 2,456,093 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #98,395 of 2,456,093 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes