Reichenbach, Russell and scientific realism.

This paper considers how to best relate the competing accounts of scientific knowledge that Russell and Reichenbach proposed in the 1930s and 1940s. At the heart of their disagreements are two different accounts of how to best combine a theory of knowledge with scientific realism. Reichenbach argued...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Synthese Vol. 199; no. 3/4; pp. 8485 - 8507
Main Author: Pincock, Christopher
Format: Article
Published: Springer Nature Dec2021
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=154096822&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 154096822
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2021
      vid: 199
      iid: 3/4
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        154096822
        10.1007/s11229-021-03172-x
      ppf: 8485
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 590KB
      tig:
        atl: Reichenbach, Russell and scientific realism.
      aug:
        au: Pincock, Christopher
        affil: Department of Philosophy, Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
      su:
        Realism
        Theory of knowledge
        Scientific knowledge
        Empiricism
      sug:
        subj:
          Realism
          Theory of knowledge
          Scientific knowledge
          Empiricism
      keyword:
        Conventionalism
        Justification of induction
        Probability
        Scientific realism
      ab: This paper considers how to best relate the competing accounts of scientific knowledge that Russell and Reichenbach proposed in the 1930s and 1940s. At the heart of their disagreements are two different accounts of how to best combine a theory of knowledge with scientific realism. Reichenbach argued that a broadly empiricist epistemology should be based on decisions. These decisions or "posits" informed Reichenbach's defense of induction and a corresponding conception of what knowledge required. Russell maintained that a scientific realist must abandon empiricism in favor of knowledge of some non-demonstrative principles with a non-empirical basis. After identifying the best versions of realism offered by Reichenbach and Russell, the paper concludes with a brief discussion of the limitations of these two approaches.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2021. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N