Erkenntnis 78 (1):29 - 38 (2013)
Chakravartty claims that science does not imply any specific metaphysical theory of the world. In this sense, science is consistent with both neo-Aristotelianism and neo-Humeanism. But, along with many others, he thinks that a neo-Aristotelian outlook best suits science. In other words, neo-Aristotelianism is supposed to win on the basis of an inference to the best explanation (IBE). I fail to see how IBE can be used to favour neo-Aristotelianism over neo-Humeanism. In this essay, I aim to do two things. Firstly, I explain why this failure is not idiosyncratic: it should be there even by Chakravartty's lights. Secondly, I raise some critical worries about Chakravartty's semirealism, especially in connection with the concept of a 'concrete structure' and the detection/auxiliary distinction. The essay ends with a dilemma: an exclusive disjunction encapsulated in its title
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Realism in the Desert and in the Jungle: Reply to French, Ghins, and Psillos. [REVIEW]Anjan Chakravartty - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (1):39 - 58.
Similar books and articles
The Philosophy of Nicolai Hartmann.Roberto Poli, Carlo Scognamiglio & Frederic Tremblay (eds.) - 2011 - Walter de Gruyter.
Consciousness, Higher-Order Content, and the Individuation of Vehicles.Uriah Kriegel - 2003 - Synthese 134 (3):477-504.
Reasons, Value, and Particular Agents: Normative Relevance Without Motivational Internalism.William J. FitzPatrick - 2004 - Mind 113 (450):285-318.
Must Rational Intentions Maximize Utility?Ralph Wedgwood - forthcoming - Philosophical Explorations.
In Defence of Aristotelian Metaphysics.Tuomas E. Tahko - 2012 - In Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press. pp. 26-43.
Added to index2010-06-16
Total downloads145 ( #32,260 of 2,163,731 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,227 of 2,163,731 )
How can I increase my downloads?