Surrealism Is Not an Alternative to Scientific Realism

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Surrealism holds that observables behave as if T were true, whereas scientific realism holds that T is true. Surrealism and scientific realism give different explanations of why T is empirically adequate. According to surrealism, T is empirically adequate because observables behave as if it were true. According to scientific realism, T is empirically adequate because it is true. I argue that the surrealist explanation merely clarifies the concept of empirical adequacy, whereas the realist explanation makes an inductive inference about T. Therefore, the surrealist explanation is a conceptual one, whereas the realist explanation is an empirical one, and the former is not an alternative to the latter.
Categories
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
2019
ISBN(s)
2069-0533
PhilPapers/Archive ID
PARSIN-2
Upload history
First archival date: 2019-09-17
Latest version: 2 (2019-09-17)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2019-09-17

Total views
96 ( #46,254 of 64,211 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #56,617 of 64,211 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.