In Patterns of Discovery, [1], and Concept of the Positron, [2], the late N. R. Hanson put forward an intersting and, I believe, essentially sound argument to the effect that, necessarily, micro-entities are "unpicturable." Hanson's claim is centrally a claim about microreduction, but his use of the term 'unpicturable' may be misleading, generating critiques which overplay its implications and its importance. A. M. Paul, in a recent article, [4], has taken Hanson to task in this regard, claiming that the notion (...) of picturability is so cloudy as to render Hanson's whole enterprise unconvincing. In what follows I shall critically discuss Hanson's argument and Paul's analysis and attempt to state a version of it capable of meeting Paul's objections. I will claim that Hanson's use of the term 'unpicturable' may be, at worst, infelicitous, and that his thesis concerning micro- or property-reduction remains unaffected by questions concerning what we can or cannot picture. (shrink)

In a recent paper, T. R. Girill claims to have found some difficulties with an earlier paper of mine in which I argued, against A. M. Paul, that in principle, micro-entities are unpicturable. Paul had argued that N. R. Hanson's view, frequently repeated in Patterns of Discovery, to the effect that … atomic particles must lack certain properties; electrons could not be other than unpicturable. The impossibility of visualizing ultimate matter is an essential feature of atomic explanation.