Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:51:06.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Structure Not Enough?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Ioannis Votsis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper counters an objection raised against one of Bertrand Russell's lesser-known epistemological views, viz. “structural realism” (SR). In short, SR holds that at most we have knowledge of the structure of the external (i.e., physical) world. M. H. A. Newman's allegedly fatal objection is that SR is either trivial or false. I argue that the accusation of triviality is itself empty since it fails to establish that SR knowledge claims are uninformative. Moreover, appealing to Quine's notion of ontological relativity, I suggest that far from being false, SR knowledge claims seem to be the most that we can hope for.

Type
Realism
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 879 - 890
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Many thanks to John Worrall, Jeff Ketland, Michael Redhead, Christoph Schmidt-Petri, and Peter Dietsch for valuable comments on the material in this paper. I gratefully acknowledge financial support for attending the PSA meeting from a National Science Foundation travel grant as well as from the Department of Philosophy at LSE.

References

Bueno, Otávio (1999), “What Is Structural Empiricism? Scientific Change in an Empiricist Setting”, What Is Structural Empiricism? Scientific Change in an Empiricist Setting 50(1): 59–85.Google Scholar
Bueno, Otávio (2000), “Empiricism, Scientific Change and Mathematical Change”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31A(2): 269–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakravartty, Anjan (1998), “Semirealism”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29A(3): 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demopoulos, William, and Friedman, Michael (1985), “Critical Notice: Bertrand Russell's The Analysis of Matter: Its Historical Context and Contemporary Interest”, Critical Notice: Bertrand Russell's The Analysis of Matter: Its Historical Context and Contemporary Interest 52:621–639.Google Scholar
French, Steven (1998), “On the Withering Away of Physical Objects”, in Castellani, Elena (ed.), Interpreting Bodies: Classical and Quantum Objects in Modern Physics. Princeton University Press, 93–113.Google Scholar
French, Steven (1999), “Models and Mathematics in Physics: The Role of Group Theory”, in Butterfield, Jeremy and Pagonis, Constantine (eds.), From Physics to Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, Steven, and Ladyman, James (forthcoming), “Remodelling Structural Realism: Quantum Physics and the Metaphysics of Structure”, Synthese.Google Scholar
Ladyman, James (1998a), “What is Structural Realism?”, What is Structural Realism? 29:409–424.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Grover (1968), “Scientific Methodology and the Causal Theory of Perception”, in Lakatos, Imre and Musgrave, Alan (eds.), Problems in the Philosophy of Science. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 148–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, Grover (1970a), “Structural Realism and the Meaning of Theoretical Terms”, in Winokur, Stephen and Radner, Michael (eds.), Analyses of Theories, and Methods of Physics and Psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 181–192.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Grover (1970b), “Theories, Perception and Structural Realism”, in Colodny, Robert (ed.), Nature and Function of Scientific Theories. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 3–34.Google Scholar
Newman, Maxwell H. A. (1928), “MR. Russell's ‘Causal Theory of Perception’”, MR. Russell's ‘Causal Theory of Perception’ 37:137–148.Google Scholar
Psillos, Stathis (2001), “Is Structural Realism Possible?”, Is Structural Realism Possible? 68 (Proceedings): S13–S24.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. (1969), Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. (1992), “Structure and Nature”, Structure and Nature 89(1): 5–9.Google Scholar
Redhead, Michael L. G. (1993), “Is the End of Physics in Sight?”, in French, Steven and Kamminga, Harmke (eds.), Correspondence, Invariance and Heuristics: In Honor of Heinz Post. Dordrecht and Boston: Kluwer Academic Press, 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redhead, Michael L. G. (2001), “The Intelligibility of the Universe”, in O'Hear, Anthony (ed.), Philosophy at the New Millennium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand ([1918], 1957), “The Relation of Sense-Data to Physics”, in Mysticism and Logic. New York: Doubleday Anchor, 140–173.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand ([1927] 1992), The Analysis of Matter. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1948), Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1968), The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, Vol. 2. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, Bas C. (1997), “Structure and Perspective: Philosophical Perplexity and Paradox”, in Dalla Chiara, Maria L. et al. (eds.), Logic and Scientific Methods. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, 511–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Fraassen, Bas C. (forthcoming), “Structure: Its Shadow and Substance”, in Ehrlich, Philip and Jones, Roger (eds.), Reverberations of the Shaky Game: Essays in Honor of Arthur Fine. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Worrall, John (1989), “Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?”, Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds? 43:99–124.Google Scholar
Worrall, John (1994), “How to Remain (Reasonably) Optimistic: Scientific Realism and the ‘Luminiferous Ether’”, in Hull, David L., Forbes, Micky, and Burian, Richard M. (eds.), PSA 1994, vol. 1. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, S334–S342.Google Scholar