Sobre el mito de que el realismo científico ha muerto
Loading...
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Fondo Editorial
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Abstract
Se cree en algunos círculos que el proyecto del realismo científico lleva tiempo muerto, a manos –reza la historia– de las críticas propuestas en el último siglo por Thomas Kuhn, Bas van Fraassen, Larry Laudan y otros importantes pensadores. Entre las jugadas libradas en su contra se destacan algunos argumentos globales sobre la infradeterminación empírica de las teorías, así como argumentos inductivos en contra del modelo de refinamiento acumulativo del avance del conocimiento científico. La fuerza de tales argumentos, tal como se los ha presentado, parece, sin embargo, grandemente exagerada. Y aunque el proyecto del realismo científico dista de estar completo, tampoco hay un caso contundente que permita declararlo en agonía (y mucho menos muerto), o tal es mi argumento en este trabajo.
It is believed in some circles that the project of Scientific Realism is long dead, killed (so the story goes) by critiques advanced in the last century by Thomas Kuhn, Bas van Fraassen, Larry Laudan, and other major thinkers. Prominent among the moves deployed against realism are some global arguments about the empirical underdetermina-tion of theories, as well as inductive arguments against the cumulative-refinement model of the advance of scientific knowledge. The power of such arguments as have been put forward seems grossly exaggerated at best, however. While the project of Scientific Realism is far from completion, no serious case exists for declaring it terminally ill (let alone dead), or so I argue in this paper.
It is believed in some circles that the project of Scientific Realism is long dead, killed (so the story goes) by critiques advanced in the last century by Thomas Kuhn, Bas van Fraassen, Larry Laudan, and other major thinkers. Prominent among the moves deployed against realism are some global arguments about the empirical underdetermina-tion of theories, as well as inductive arguments against the cumulative-refinement model of the advance of scientific knowledge. The power of such arguments as have been put forward seems grossly exaggerated at best, however. While the project of Scientific Realism is far from completion, no serious case exists for declaring it terminally ill (let alone dead), or so I argue in this paper.
Description
Keywords
Filosofía, Realismo Científico, Filosofía de la Ciencia, Historia de la Ciencia, Epistemología Sincrónica y Diacrónica, Infradeterminación Empírica
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

