Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T03:56:06.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reinventing Certainty: The Significance of Ian Hacking’s Realism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Alan G. Gross
Alan G. Gross*
Affiliation:
Purdue University—Calumet
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a recent paper (1989), Ian Hacking has extended his discussion of entity realism, a discussion begun six years ago in the final chapter of Representing and Intervening (1983). This extension allows us to examine for the first time the whole of one impressive attempt to rescue scientific realism from the ever more subtle skepticism of post-positivist thinking (Laudan 1984; Fine 1986). Hacking’s approach complements that of Nancy Cartwright. Like Cartwright, he implies that a full-blown realism about scientific theories and entities can survive neither the facts of history nor the arguments of opponents. Hacking is a realist only about some unobservable entities, those he thinks durable enough to survive most alterations in theory. This is the science that Kuhn said survived even paradigm change.

Electrons are Hacking’s example of a real unobservable entity. Their behavior is so consistent and so well-known that they are used as tools: they are manipulated in the engineering of scientific experiments designed to extend the bounds of the known.

Type
Part VII. Realism
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 421 - 431
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1990

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

1

I would like to acknowledge the support of a Scholarly Award from Purdue University Calumet.

References

Boag, P.T. and Grant, P.R.. (1981), “Intense NaturalSelection in a Population of Darwin’s Finches (Geospizinae) in the Galápagos”, Science 214: 82–85. Reprinted in Smith 1982, pp. 175–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, N. (1983), How the Laws of Science Lie. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, N. (1989), “A Case Study in Realism: Why Econometrics is Committed to Capacities”, in Fine and Leplin, pp. 190–97.Google Scholar
Charlesworth, B., Lande, R., and Slatkin, M.. (1982), “Neo-Darwinian Commentary on Macroevolution”, Evolution 36:474-98.Google ScholarPubMed
Descartes, R. (1983/84), Principles of Philosophy. Miller, V.R. and Miller, R.P. (trans.). Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Fine, A. (1986), The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and The Quantum Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fine, A. and Leplin, J. (eds). (1989), PSA 1988: Proceedings of the 1988 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Vol 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Guerlac, H. (1981), Newton on the Continent. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1983), Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, I. (1988), “The Sociology of Knowledge about Child Abuse”, Nous 22:53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, I. (1989), “Philosophers of Experiment”, inFine and Leplin, pp. 147–56.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1989), “Extragalactic Reality: The Case of Gravitational Lensing”, Philosophy of Science 56: 555–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, J.S. (1981), “An Uncensored Page of Fossil History”, Nature 293: 427–28. Reprinted in Smith 1982, pp. 167-70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lande, R. (1980), “Microevolution in Relation to Macroevolution”, Paleobiology 6: 235-38. Reprinted in Smith 1982, pp. 146–53.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. (1984), “A Confutation of Convergent Realism”, in Scientific Realism. Leplin, J. (ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 218-49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorentz, H. A. (1895), “Michelson’s Interference Experiment”, in Perrett, W. and Jeffrey, G. B. (trans.). The Principle of Relativity: A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theories of Relativity, by Lorentz, H.A., Einstein, A., Minkowski, H., and Weyl, H. New York: Dover, 1952, pp. 3–7.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1982), Systematics and the Origin of Species. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Michelson, A.A. (1881), “The Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether”, American Journal of Science 22: 120 ff. 3rd series. Reprinted in Swenson 1972, pp. 249–58.Google Scholar
Pickering, A. (1984), Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Smith, J.M. (ed.). (1982), Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, E. (ed.). (1984), Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Swenson, L.S. Jr. (1972), The Etherial Aether: A History of The Michelson-Moreley-Miller Aether-Drift Experiments, 1880-1930. Austin: University of Texas Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, E. L. (1988), “Gravitational Lenses”, Scientific American 259: 54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, M. J. (1978), “A Critical Review of the Models of Group Selection”, Quarterly Review of Biology 53: 101–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, P.G. (1981a), “Paleontological Documentation of Speciation in Cenozoic Molluscs from Turkana Basin”, Nature 293: 437–43. Reprinted in Smith 1982, pp. 154-66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, P.G. (1981b), “Morphological Stasis and Developmental Constraint: Real Problems for Neo-Darwinism”, Nature 294: 214–15. Reprinted in Smith 1982, pp. 171-74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1974), “Complexity and Organization”, in Schaffner, K.F. and Cohen, R. S. (eds.), PSA 1972: Proceedings of the 1972 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 67–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1980), “Reductionist Research Strategies and Their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy”, in Nickles, T. (ed.), Scientific Discoveries: Case Studies. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 213–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1981), “Robustness, Reliability, and Overdetermination,” in Brewer, M. and Collins, B. (eds.), Scientific Inquiry and the Social Sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 124–53.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1983), “Von Baer’s Law of Development, Generative Retrenchment, and Scientific Change.” Unpublished, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1984), “Heuristics and the Study of Man.” Unpublished, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar