Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Arguments for Scientific Realism: The Ascending Spiral.Alison Wylie - 1986 - American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (3):287 - 297.
    Although I have little sympathy for Nagel's instrumentalism, his "dictum" on the debates over scientific realism (as Boyd refers to it) is disconcertingly accurate; it does seem as if "the already long controversy...can be prolonged indefinitely." The reason for this, however, is not that realists and instrumentalists are divided by merely terminological differences in their "preferred mode[s] of speech", indeed, this analysis appeals only if you are already convinced that realism of any robust sort is mistaken. The debates persist, instead, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • On accepting Van Fraassen's image of science.Jeff Foss - 1984 - Philosophy of Science 51 (1):79-92.
    In his book, The Scientific Image, van Fraassen lucidly draws an alternative to scientific realism, which he calls "Constructive Empiricism". In this epistemological theory, the concept of observability plays the pivotal role: acceptable theories may be believed only where what they say solely concerns observables. Van Fraassen develops a concept of observability which is, as he admits, vague, relative, science-dependent, and anthropocentric. I draw out unacceptable consequences of each of these aspects of his concept. Also, I argue against his assumption (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • On rejecting Foss's image of Van Fraassen.Warren Bourgeois - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (2):303-308.
    Foss's critique of van Fraassen's constructive empiricism is shown to be completely wide of the mark (Foss 1984, van Fraassen 1980). Foss misunderstands van Fraassen's use of the terms 'observable', 'phenomena', 'empirical adequacy', and 'epistemic community'. He misconstrues constructive empiricism as making knowledge, and perhaps existence, dependent on the observer. On the basis of this error, he attempts to reduce constructive empiricism to skepticism. None of his criticisms are to the point.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations