Abstract
Nickles raises many original objections against scientific realism. One of them holds that scientific realism originates from the end of history illusion. I reply that this objection is self-defeating and commits the genetic fallacy. Another objection is that it is unknowable whether our descendants will regard our current mature theories as true or false. I reply that this objection entails skepticism about induction, leading to skepticism about the world, which is inconsistent with the appeal to the end of history illusion. Finally, I argue that we have an inductive rationale for thinking that will lead our descendants to regard our current mature theories as true.
Reference25 articles.
1. Alai M. (2017), “Resisting the Historical Objections to Realism: Is Doppelt’s a Viable Solution?” Synthese 194 (9): 3267–3290.
2. Fahrbach L. (2011), “How the Growth of Science Ends Theory Change,” Synthese 180 (2): 139–155.
3. Hume D. (1888/1978), A Treatise of Human Nature, L.A. Selby-Bigge and P.H. Nidditch (eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford.
4. Kuhn T. (1962/1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
5. Mizrahi M. (2013), “The Pessimistic Induction: A Bad Argument Gone Too Far,” Synthese 190 (15): 3209–3226.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献