Are models our tools not our masters?
It is often claimed that one can avoid the kind of underdetermination that is a typical consequence of symmetries in physics by stipulating that symmetry-related models represent the same state of affairs (Leibniz Equivalence). But recent commentators (Dasgupta in Philos Perspect 25:115–160, 2011; P...
| Publicado en: | Synthese Vol. 202; no. 4; pp. 1 - 22 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Oct2023
|
| 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=172861232&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 172861232 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00397857 4LI jtl: Synthese issn: 00397857 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Oct2023 vid: 202 iid: 4 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 172861232 10.1007/s11229-023-04352-7 ppf: 1 ppct: 21 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 747KB tig: atl: Are models our tools not our masters? aug: au: Jacobs, Caspar affil: https://ror.org/027bh9e22 Institute for Philosophy, Leiden University, Nonnensteeg 1-3, 2311 BE, Leiden, The Netherlands sug: keyword: Invariance Leibniz Equivalence Models Representation Representational capacities Representational convention Symmetries Theoretical equivalence ab: It is often claimed that one can avoid the kind of underdetermination that is a typical consequence of symmetries in physics by stipulating that symmetry-related models represent the same state of affairs (Leibniz Equivalence). But recent commentators (Dasgupta in Philos Perspect 25:115–160, 2011; Pooley in: Knox and Wilson (eds) The Routledge companion to the philosophy of physics, Routledge, Milton Park, 2021; Pooley and Read in Br J Philos Sci, 2021, ; Teitel in J Philos 119:233–278, 2021) have responded that claims about the representational capacities of models are irrelevant to the issue of underdetermination, which concerns possible worlds themselves. In this paper I distinguish two versions of this objection: (1) that a theory’s formalism does not (fully) determine the space of physical possibilities, and (2) that the relevant notion of possibility is not physical possibility. I offer a refutation of each. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2023. All Rights Reserved. item: Synthese holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2023 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|