برخورد واقع‌گرایی علمی با شروح بازنمایی علمی

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسنده

پژوهشکده مطالعات بنیادین علم و فناوری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

10.48308/kj.2025.240800.1338

چکیده

مطابق واقع‌گرایی علمی، نظریه‌های علمی بالغْ (تقریباً) صادق‌‌اند و به‌خاطر این صدق (تقریبی) است که موفق‌اند. مطابق شروح (اصالت‌گرایانه) از بازنمایی علمی، مدل‌های علمی به تحقق فضایل معرفتی می‌انجامند، چون جهان را بازنمایی می‌کنند. هدف اصلی این مقاله بررسی این پرسش است که آیا واقع‌گرایی علمی با نگرش‌های مختلف به بازنمایی علمی، یعنی دیدگاه‌های شباهت-محور، عامل-محور و ترکیبی، سازگار است یا خیر. برای این منظور، ابتدا نشان داده می‌شود که واقع‌گرایی علمی، حداقل‌ در نظر اول، با این شروح نسبتی ندارد. سپس راه‌های ارتباط میانشان بررسی و سرانجام استدلال می‌شود که، به‌شرطِ اضافه‌کردن جزئیاتی، واقع‌گرایی علمی با نمونه‌هایی از هر سه نگرش ناسازگار است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Scientific Realism Meets Accounts of Scientific Representation

چکیده [English]

On scientific realism, mature scientific theories are (approximately) true, and in virtue of this (approximate) truth they are successful. According to the substantialist accounts of scientific representation, scientific models enable cognitive agents to reach epistemic virtues because they represent the world. This article aims to scrutinize the question of whether scientific realism is consistent with the three well-known approaches to scientific representation, namely similarity-based, agent-based, and hybrid views. To do so, it will be argued that these approaches are, at least prima facie, orthogonal to scientific realism. After addressing the ways in which they become related, it will be argued that scientific realism is inconsistent with instances of all three approaches, provided certain assumptions are taken into account.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • scientific realism
  • scientific representation
  • similarity-based approach
  • agent-based approach
  • hybrid approach
Bueno, O., & Colyvan, M. (2011). An Inferential Conception of the Application of Mathematics. Noûs, 45(2), 345-374. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00772.x
Bueno, O., & French, S. (2011). How Thories Represent. British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, 1-38
Callender, C., & Cohen, J. (2006). There Is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation. Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia, 21(1), 67-85.
da Costa, N. C. A., & French, S. (2003). Science and Partial Truth: A Unitary Approach to Models and Scientific Reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
French, S. (2003). A Model-Theoretic Account of Representation (Or, I Don't Know Much about Art . . . but I Know It Involves Isomorphism(Philosophy of Science, 70, 1472-1483.
French, S. (2010). Keeping quiet on the ontology of models. Synthese, 172(2), 231-249.
French, S. (2014). The Structure of the World: Metaphysics and Representation: Oxford University Press.
French, S., & Saatsi, J. (2006). Realism about Structure: The Semantic View and Nonlinguistic Representations. Philosophy of Science, 73(5), 548-559.
Frigg, R., & Nguyen, J. (2017). Models and representation. In L. Magnani & T. Bertolotti (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science (pp. 49-102).
Frigg, R., & Nguyen, J. (2020). Modelling Nature. An Opinionated Introduction to Scientific Representation: Springer.
Giere, R. N. (2006). Scientific Perspectivism. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Giere, R. N. (2010). An agent-based conception of models and scientific representation. Synthese, 172, 269–281.
Khalifa, K., Millson, J., & Risjord, M. (2022). Scientific Representation: An Inferentialist-Expressivist Manifesto. Philosophical Topics, 50(1), 263-291.
Lutz, S. (2017). What was the syntax‐semantics debate in the philosophy of science about? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 95(2), 319-352.
Massimi, M. (2022). Perspectival realism: Oxford University Press.
Miller, K., & Norton, J. (2022). Non‐cognitivism about Metaphysical explanation. Analytic Philosophy, 64(2), 1-20.
Nguyen, J. (2016). How models represent. PhD, London School of Economics and Political Science, London. 
Nguyen, J., & Frigg, R. (2022). Scientific representation: Cambridge University Press.
Putnam, H. (1975). Mathematics, matter, and method: Cambridge University Press.
Sankey, H. (2008). Scientific realism and the rationality of science: Ashgate.
Suárez, M. (2003). Scientific representation: against similarity and isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 172, 225-244.
Suppe, F. (1989). The Semantic Conception of Theories and Scientific Realism: University of Illinois Press.
Suppes, P. (1967). What Is a Scientific Theory? In S. Morgenbesser (Ed.), Philosophy of Science Today (pp. 55-67). New York: Basic Books.
Suppes, P. (2002). Representation and Invariance of Scientific Structures. Stanford: CSLI.
Van Fraassen , B. C. (1970). On the Extension of Beth's Semantics of Physical Theories. Philosophy of Science, 37, 325-339.
Van Fraassen , B. C. (2008). Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
van Fraassen, B. C. (2014). One or Two Gentle Remarks about Hans Halvorson’s Critique of the Semantic View. Philosophy of Science, 81(2), 276-283.
Van Fraassen , B. C. (2024). The Semantic Approach, After 50 Years. In C. Beisbart & M. Frauchiger (Eds.), Scientific Theories and Philosophical Stances: Themes from van Fraassen (pp. 23-86): De Gruyter.
Yaghmaie, A. (2023). Grounding scientific representation. Synthese, 202(6), 1-25.