🤓Intro to Epistemology Unit 10 – Scientific Realism vs. Anti-Realism in Science

What's This All About?

• Scientific realism and anti-realism are two opposing philosophical views about the nature of scientific theories and their relationship to reality
• Realists believe that scientific theories aim to provide true descriptions of the world, including unobservable entities and processes
• Anti-realists, on the other hand, are skeptical about the existence of unobservable entities and the truth-value of scientific theories
• The debate centers around the question of whether scientific theories should be interpreted as literally true or merely useful tools for making predictions
• Key issues in the debate include the underdetermination of theories by evidence, the problem of induction, and the role of social and cultural factors in science
• The outcome of this debate has significant implications for how we understand the nature of scientific knowledge and the progress of science over time
• The realism/anti-realism debate is not limited to science but also extends to other areas of philosophy, such as ethics and mathematics

Key Players and Their Ideas

• Bas van Fraassen: Developed the influential anti-realist position known as constructive empiricism, which holds that scientific theories should be evaluated based on their empirical adequacy rather than their truth
• Alan Musgrave: Defends scientific realism, arguing that the success of science in making novel predictions and developing new technologies supports the view that scientific theories are approximately true
• Thomas Kuhn: Challenged the realist view of science with his concept of paradigm shifts, suggesting that scientific theories are not cumulative but rather replace one another through revolutionary changes
• Larry Laudan: Proposed the pessimistic meta-induction argument against realism, pointing out that many successful theories in the past have turned out to be false
• Hilary Putnam: Developed the no miracles argument for realism, claiming that the success of science would be a miracle if scientific theories were not at least approximately true
  • Putnam also introduced the concept of reference stability, arguing that the referents of scientific terms remain stable across theory changes
• Arthur Fine: Advocates a non-realist position called the natural ontological attitude (NOA), which eschews both realism and anti-realism in favor of a minimalist, pragmatic approach to science
• Nancy Cartwright: Defends a form of entity realism, which accepts the existence of theoretical entities that can be causally manipulated while remaining agnostic about the truth of scientific theories as a whole

The Realist Camp: What They Believe

• Scientific realism is the view that scientific theories aim to provide true descriptions of both observable and unobservable aspects of reality
• Realists believe that the entities, processes, and structures postulated by successful scientific theories actually exist in the world, independent of our minds
• According to realists, the success of science in making accurate predictions, explaining phenomena, and developing new technologies is best explained by the approximate truth of scientific theories
• Realists argue that the history of science shows a cumulative growth of knowledge, with newer theories building upon and refining the insights of earlier theories
• They maintain that scientific progress is possible because theories can converge on the truth over time, even if they are never perfect or complete
• Realists often invoke inference to the best explanation (IBE) to justify their belief in unobservable entities, arguing that the existence of these entities is the best explanation for the observable phenomena
• Some realists, known as structural realists, focus on the mathematical structures described by scientific theories rather than the nature of theoretical entities themselves
  • Structural realists argue that what is preserved across theory changes is the mathematical structure, not necessarily the ontological commitments

Anti-Realists: The Skeptics' View

• Anti-realists are skeptical about the existence of unobservable entities and the truth-value of scientific theories
• They argue that scientific theories should be evaluated based on their empirical adequacy (ability to save the phenomena) rather than their truth
• Constructive empiricism, developed by Bas van Fraassen, is a prominent anti-realist position that views science as aiming to produce empirically adequate theories rather than true ones
• Anti-realists point out that the history of science is full of successful theories that were later abandoned or replaced, suggesting that success is no guarantee of truth (pessimistic meta-induction)
• They argue that scientific theories are underdetermined by evidence, meaning that multiple theories can be consistent with the same empirical data
  • This underdetermination problem undermines the realist claim that successful theories must be true
• Some anti-realists, such as instrumentalists, view scientific theories as merely useful tools for making predictions and guiding action, without any commitment to their truth or falsity
• Other anti-realists, such as social constructivists, emphasize the role of social and cultural factors in shaping scientific knowledge, challenging the idea of objective truth in science

Battle of Arguments: Realism vs. Anti-Realism

• The no miracles argument is a central argument for scientific realism, claiming that the success of science would be a miracle if scientific theories were not at least approximately true
  • Anti-realists counter that success can be explained by factors other than truth, such as the empirical adequacy of theories or their usefulness in solving problems
• The pessimistic meta-induction argument, proposed by Larry Laudan, points out that many successful theories in the past have turned out to be false, undermining the realist claim that success is a reliable indicator of truth
  • Realists respond by arguing that newer theories often preserve the key insights of earlier theories, and that the history of science shows a cumulative growth of knowledge despite occasional theory changes
• The underdetermination argument, emphasized by anti-realists, holds that scientific theories are underdetermined by evidence, meaning that multiple theories can be consistent with the same empirical data
  • Realists argue that underdetermination is not a fatal problem, as scientists can still make rational theory choices based on criteria such as simplicity, explanatory power, and unifying power
• Structural realism, a form of scientific realism, focuses on the continuity of mathematical structures across theory changes rather than the continuity of theoretical entities
  • This position aims to reconcile the insights of both realism and anti-realism by acknowledging the success of science while avoiding commitment to the existence of specific unobservable entities
• The natural ontological attitude (NOA), proposed by Arthur Fine, rejects both realism and anti-realism in favor of a minimalist, pragmatic approach to science that focuses on the practice of science itself rather than philosophical debates about truth and reality

Real-World Examples and Case Studies

• The atomic theory of matter is a classic example of a scientific theory that postulates unobservable entities (atoms) to explain observable phenomena
  • The success of the atomic theory in explaining and predicting chemical reactions, among other things, is often cited as evidence for scientific realism
• The theory of continental drift, proposed by Alfred Wegener in the early 20th century, was initially met with skepticism but later gained acceptance as evidence accumulated
  • This case illustrates how scientific theories can be initially controversial but eventually become widely accepted as more evidence is gathered
• The history of theories about the nature of light (particle vs. wave theories) demonstrates how competing theories can be underdetermined by evidence, with both theories being consistent with observed phenomena
  • This case is often used to support the anti-realist argument that successful theories are not necessarily true
• The phlogiston theory of combustion, which was widely accepted in the 18th century but later replaced by the oxygen theory, is an example of a successful theory that turned out to be false
  • This case is often cited in support of the pessimistic meta-induction argument against scientific realism
• The discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation, predicted by the Big Bang theory, is an example of a novel prediction that was later confirmed by observation
  • Realists argue that the success of the Big Bang theory in making this novel prediction supports the view that the theory is approximately true

Why It Matters: Practical Implications

• The realism/anti-realism debate has implications for how we interpret and apply scientific knowledge in real-world contexts, such as policy-making and public understanding of science
• If scientific theories are viewed as literally true (realism), this may lead to greater confidence in using them as a basis for decision-making and action
  • For example, if climate change models are seen as accurately representing reality, this may strengthen the case for taking aggressive action to mitigate its effects
• If scientific theories are viewed as merely useful tools (anti-realism), this may lead to a more cautious or skeptical approach to applying them in practice
  • For example, if economic models are seen as imperfect tools rather than true descriptions of reality, this may lead to more cautious use of them in policy-making
• The debate also has implications for science education and communication, as it influences how scientific knowledge is presented to students and the public
  • A realist perspective may emphasize the objective truth of scientific theories, while an anti-realist perspective may focus more on their practical applications and limitations
• The way in which scientific research is funded and prioritized may also be influenced by realist or anti-realist assumptions about the nature and goals of science
• The realism/anti-realism debate can shape the way in which scientists themselves approach their work, influencing their research questions, methods, and interpretations of results

Wrapping It Up: Current State of the Debate

• The realism/anti-realism debate remains an active and contentious area of research in philosophy of science, with no clear consensus emerging
• Recent developments, such as the rise of structural realism and the natural ontological attitude, have aimed to find a middle ground between the realist and anti-realist positions
• Empirical work in the history and sociology of science has provided new insights into the complex factors that shape the development of scientific knowledge, challenging simplistic realist or anti-realist narratives
• The debate has also been influenced by developments in other areas of philosophy, such as the realism/anti-realism debate in metaphysics and the role of social and cultural factors in shaping knowledge
• Some philosophers have argued that the realism/anti-realism dichotomy is too simplistic and that a more nuanced and pluralistic approach to understanding science is needed
• Despite the lack of resolution, the realism/anti-realism debate remains an important and stimulating area of inquiry that continues to generate new insights into the nature of scientific knowledge and its relationship to reality
• As science continues to evolve and new theories and evidence emerge, the debate is likely to take on new forms and dimensions, reflecting the dynamic and open-ended nature of scientific inquiry itself