The Tension between the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives and Epistemic Instrumentalism.
In this paper, I develop a critical assessment of epistemic instrumentalism as advocated by Kyle Stanford (2006). Epistemic instrumentalism is based on the claim that the criterion for the reliability of any theory is the absence of what Stanford calls 'unconceived alternatives'. This means that the...
| Publicado en: | Problems / Problemos Vol. 102; pp. 50 - 59 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Vilnius University
2022
|
| 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=160804485&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 160804485 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13921126 3D4C jtl: Problems / Problemos issn: 13921126 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2022 vid: 102 pid: 16037 pub: Vilnius University artinfo: ui: 160804485 10.15388/Problemos.2022.102.4 ppf: 50 ppct: 9 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 1.4MB tig: atl: The Tension between the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives and Epistemic Instrumentalism. aug: au: Zorzato, Lisa affil: Tartu University su: Instrumentalism (Philosophy) Common sense Engineering reliability theory sug: subj: Instrumentalism (Philosophy) Common sense Engineering reliability theory keyword: antirealism common sense realism scientific reliability Stanford unconceived alternatives antirealizmas mokslinis patikimumas neįsivaizduojamos alternatyvos realizmas Stanfordas sveikas protas ab: In this paper, I develop a critical assessment of epistemic instrumentalism as advocated by Kyle Stanford (2006). Epistemic instrumentalism is based on the claim that the criterion for the reliability of any theory is the absence of what Stanford calls 'unconceived alternatives'. This means that the theory is reliable if and only if it does not admit of alternatives. Since most scientific theories do admit of unconceived alternatives, Stanford claims, they cannot be reliable. In contrast, 'common sense' claims are not exposed to unconceived alternatives, therefore they are reliable. Here, I analyse the definition of 'common sense' and argue that it is equally vulnerable to the 'problem of unconceived alternatives', pushing epistemic instrumentalism position to scepticism. The consequence is that the position of epistemic instrumentalist has nothing to stand on. Straipsnyje analizuojamas kritinis episteminio instrumentalizmo vertinimas, kurį išplėtojo Kyle'as Stanfordas (2006). Episteminis instrumentalizmas grindžiamas teiginiu, kad bet kurios teorijos patikimumo kriterijus yra nebuvimas to, ką Stanfordas vadina „neįsivaizduojamomis alternatyvomis". Tai reiškia, kad teorija yra patikima tada ir tik tada, kai ji neleidžia alternatyvų. Pasak Stanfordo, kadangi dauguma mokslinių teorijų pripažįsta neįsivaizduojamas alternatyvas, jos negali būti patikimos; o „sveiko proto" teiginiai, priešingai, esą patikimi, kadangi jiems nesiūlomos neįsivaizduojamos alternatyvos. Straipsnyje analizuojamas „sveiko proto" apibrėžimas ir teigiama, kad jis yra lygiai taip pat pažeidžiamas „neįsivaizduojamų alternatyvų problemos", o episteminio instrumentalizmo pozicija stumiama į skepticizmo glėbį. Autorė teigia, kad episteminio instrumentalisto pozicija neturi į ką atsiremti. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Problems / Problemos is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Problems / Problemos holder: Vilnius University dt: @attributes: year: 2022 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|