Updated: 03 March 2000

UTD - strong thesis

For any theory T1 there is another theory T2 such that:

1. T1, T2 logically incompatible.

2. T1, T2 empirically equivalent.

3. T1, T2 do equally well in terms of any epistemically viable principle of theory choice.

strong thesis makes IBE problematic

1.

Why believe in UTD ?

1. Analogy - curve plotting

2. Freedom to adjust mathematic structure

3. Holism - never test hypothesis in isolation

2.

Holism

hypotheses cannot be tested in isolation.

alternative responses always possible

d(t) = gt2

1. clock

2. ruler

3. observer

4. value for g

5. equation itself

But plausibility of the claim that alternatives always possible depends on plausibility of thesis of Underdetermination

3.

A couple of asides :

1. Popper :

In the case of an apparent falsification, how does Popper know what to blame ?

Could it be that he inductively infers that observers have let him down in the past and hence are not to be trusted on this occasion? Or that the value of g is ok because the methods used for determining g have been particularly reliable in the past?

4.

2. Edinburgh

strong programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge

Assume only undetermination by actual data.

Scientists regularly make choices in this situation. Choice cannot be explained rationally (after all this is underdetermination). So explanation must lie in social factors and/or pyschological ones.

Role of so-called “pragmatic factors” such as simplicity

Role of judgment

5.

Problems with strong underdetermination

Notational variants

Absence of examples ?

(no Nobel prizes for second theory)

(density vs continuity)

Speculative Idea ??

inadequate basis for an approach to science

If at best there are limited examples, then at worst realism must be constrained

6.

Instrumentalism as fictionalism

“the easy way to Underdetermination”

T1: There are electrons and ...

T2: There are no electrons but everything happens as if T1 were true.

For the realist T2 self-destructs

Realism is exciting because it takes risks: could be falsified by strong underdetermination

Strong UTD affects both local and global realism.

But it is just a speculation and for the moment the realist can sleep easily.

7.

Why not then use IBE to argue for realism locally ?

Look at your actual history

Mach : talk of atoms is a useful device to facilitate predictions

Einstein: atoms really exist, posited to explain Brownian motion

Ostwald 1905 Preface

the atomic theory is a device, not to be taken literally

Ostwald 1915 Preface

atomic hypothesis is true

Einstein - calculated rate of diffusion

Perrin - produced latex particles of known size and shape confirming Einstein

See R Miller Fact and Method

8.

Realism

needs novel predictions which are corroborated

plus further theoretical developments with further corroborated novel predictions

Cautious realism

origin of the universe ?

black holes ?

9.

Instrumentalist

Different stance to theoretical discourse.

Common assumption with realist:

realism about medium sized macroscopic objects and use of IBE at that level

Instrumentalist has to characterize the realm of discourse to which a different stance is taken.

Characterization of that realm must rationalize the difference in treatment.

10.

Van Fraassen uses a biological characterization.

Churchland queries its relevance.

See his paper in Images of Science

Bas van Fraassen

Douglas van Firrson

(a noted rooted arboreal philosopher with electron microscope eyes)

11.

Why assume that UTD begins at the non-observable as defined by van Fraassen?

Maybe there is only one story until you reach the level of the quark.

electron - via quarks

electron - via krauqs

12.

Where (if anywhere) UTD begins, instrumentalism may be appropriate.

No reason to think that the point at which underdetermination begins is the point at which we are dealing with non-observables.

No reason to drop IBE when we pass over the O/non-O border.

Drop when Underdetermination starts.

13.

Modest Realism

Seamless web argument.

No dichotomy between ordinary and scientific discourse. So some reason must be given for thinking that as we move away from ordinary discourse the tools we use there become inappropriate.

UTD right sort of reason but does not appear extensive enough to really worry the realist.

14.

Challenge to Modest Realism

Explication of notion of approximation to the truth

An Alternative

Current theories more worthy of belief

Some components may be expect to survive

Physics as the exception

15.

Kuhn: puzzle solving

An Alternative to truth or approximate truth?

empirical problems

theoretical problems

real solution requires truth

16.