A Modest Refutation of Manifestationalism
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0426-8392
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
In their recent “A modest defense of manifestationalism” (2015), Asay and Bordner defend this position from a quite famous criticism put forward by Rosen (1994), according to which while manifestationalism can be seen as more compatible with the letter of empiricism than other popular stances, such as constructive empiricism, it fails nonetheless to make sense of science. The two authors reckon that Rosen’s argument is actually flawed. In their view, manifestationalism could in fact represent a legitimate thesis about the nature of scientific inquiry. In this paper, I will show that Asay and Bordner’s criticisms to Rosen are actually off target. Moreover, they rest upon an understanding of what the aim of science is that might serve to their purposes, but that does not seem to be in line with the scientific enterprise. Perhaps constructive empiricism still represents the best compromise so far presented between strict empiricism and the acknowledgment of the rationality of science.
Asay and Bordner, constructive empiricism, manifestationalism, Rosen, van FraassenAsay y Bordner, empirismo constructivo, manifestacionalismo, Rosen, van Fraassen
Asay, J., & Bordner, S. S. (2015). A modest defense of manifestationalism. Synthese, 192(1), 147-161. doi: 10.1007/s11229-014-0556-5
Bourgeois, W. (1987). Discussion: On Rejecting Foss’s Image of Van Fraassen. Philosophy of Science, 54(2), 303-308. doi: 10.1086/289380
Churchland, P. M. (1982). The Anti-Realist Epistemology of van Fraassen’s The Scientific Image. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 63, jul., 226-235. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0114.1982.tb00101.x
Churchland, P. M. (1985). The ontological status of observables: in praise of the superempirical virtues. In: Churchland, P. M. & Hooker, C. A. (Eds.), Images of Science. Essays on Realism and Empiricism, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen (pp. 35-47). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Foss, J. (1984). On Accepting Van Fraassen’s Image of Science. Philosophy of Science, 51(1), mar., 79-92. doi: 10.1086/289165
Fraassen, B. C. van (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press. doi: 10.2307/2184804
Fraassen, B. C. van (1985). Empiricism in the Philosophy of Science. In: P. M. Churchland & C. A. Hooker (Eds.), Images of Science. Essays on Realism and Empiricism, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen (pp. 245-308). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Fraassen, B. C. van (1992). From Vicious Circle to Infinite Regress, and Back Again. Philosophy of Science Association Proceedings, 2, 6-29.
Fraassen, B. C. van (2005). The Day of the Dolphins. Puzzling over Epistemic Partnership. In: A. Irvine & K. Peacock (Eds.), Mistakes of Reason: Essays in Honour of John Woods (pp. 111-133). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. doi: 10.3138/9781442677296-010
Kukla, A. (1996). The Theory-Observation Distinction. The Philosophical Review, 105(2), 173-230. doi: 10.2307/2185717
Ladyman, J. (2004). Constructive Empiricism and Modal Metaphysics: A Reply to Monton and van Fraassen. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 55(4), 755-765. doi: 10.1093/bjps/55.4.755
Maxwell, G. (1962). The ontological status of theoretical entities. In: H. Feigl & G. Maxwell (Eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 3: Scientific Explanation, Space, and Time (pp. 3-27). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Monton, B. & Fraassen, B. C. van (2003). Constructive Empiricism and Modal Nominalism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 54(3), 405-422. doi: 10.1093/bjps/54.3.405
Muller, F. A. (2004). Can a Constructive Empiricist Adopt the Concept of Observability? Philosophy of Science, 71(4), 637-654. doi: 10.1086/381414
Railton, P. (1989). Explanation and Metaphysical Controversy. In: P. Kitcher & W. C. Salmon (Eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 13: Scientific Explanation (pp. 220-252). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Rosen, G. (1994). What is Constructive Empiricism? Philosophical Studies, 74(2), 143-178. doi: 10.1007/BF00989801
Sicha, J. F. (1992). Reviewed Work: Images of Science. Essays on Realism and Empiricism, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen by P. M. Churchland; C. A. Hooker. Noûs, 26(4), 519-525. doi: 10.2307/2216033
Van Dyck, M. (2007). Constructive Empiricism and the Argument from Underdetermination. In: B. Monton (Ed.), Images of Empiricism. Essays on Science and Stances, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen (pp. 11-31). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.