Formulational vs. Epistemological Debates Concerning Scientific Realism

Dialogue 59 (3):479-496 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A formulational debate is a debate over whether certain definitions of scientific realism and antirealism are useful or useless. By contrast, an epistemological debate is a debate over whether we have sufficient evidence for scientific realism and antirealism defined in a certain manner. I argue that Hilary Putnam’s definitions of scientific realism and antirealism are more useful than Bas van Fraassen’s definitions of scientific realism and constructive empiricism because Putnam’s definitions can generate both formulational and epistemological debates, whereas van Fraassen’s can generate only formulational debates.

Author's Profile

Seungbae Park
Ulsan National Institute Of Science And Technology

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-01-21

Downloads
190 (#42,380)

6 months
37 (#34,405)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?