Modal inferences in science: a tale of two epistemologies.

Recent epistemology of modality has seen a growing trend towards metaphysics-first approaches. Contrastingly, this paper offers a more philosophically modest account of justifying modal claims, focusing on the practices of scientific modal inferences. Two ways of making such inferences are identifie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 199; no. 5/6; pp. 13823 - 13844
Autores principales: Hirvonen, Ilmari, Koskinen, Rami, Pättiniemi, Ilkka
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Dec2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=154480437&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 154480437
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2021
      vid: 199
      iid: 5/6
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        154480437
        10.1007/s11229-021-03399-8
      ppf: 13823
      ppct: 21
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 347KB
      tig:
        atl: Modal inferences in science: a tale of two epistemologies.
      aug:
        au:
          Hirvonen, Ilmari
          Koskinen, Rami
          Pättiniemi, Ilkka
        affil:
          Practical Philosophy, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 24, Unioninkatu 40, 00014, Helsinki, Finland
          Department of Philosophy, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010, Vienna, Austria
      su:
        Theory of knowledge
        Model theory
      sug:
        subj:
          Theory of knowledge
          Model theory
      keyword:
        Epistemology of modality
        Manipulation
        Necessity
        Possibility
        Relative modality
        Scientific inference
      ab: Recent epistemology of modality has seen a growing trend towards metaphysics-first approaches. Contrastingly, this paper offers a more philosophically modest account of justifying modal claims, focusing on the practices of scientific modal inferences. Two ways of making such inferences are identified and analyzed: actualist-manipulationist modality (AM) and relative modality (RM). In AM, what is observed to be or not to be the case in actuality or under manipulations, allows us to make modal inferences. AM-based inferences are fallible, but the same holds for practically all empirical inquiry. In RM, modal inferences are evaluated relative to what is kept fixed in a system, like a theory or a model. RM-based inferences are more certain but framework-dependent. While elements from both AM and RM can be found in some existing accounts of modality, it is worth highlighting them in their own right and isolating their features for closer scrutiny. This helps to establish their relevant epistemologies that are free from some strong philosophical assumptions often attached to them in the literature. We close by showing how combining these two routes amounts to a view that accounts for a rich variety of modal inferences in science.
      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