Scientific Realism and Instrumentalism
Two central questions about science are (1) what are the aims of science and (2) how should one interpret the results of science? Scientific realists claim that science aims at truth and that one ought to regard scientific theories as true, approximately true, or likely true. Conversely, a scientific antirealist or instrumentalist argues that science does not aim (or at least does not succeed) at truth and that we should not regard scientific theories as true. Some antirealists claim that scientific theories aim at being instrumentally useful and should only be regarded as useful, but not true, descriptions of the world.
Realists often point to the success of recent scientific theories as evidence for the truth (or near truth) of our current theories. Antirealists point to either the history of science, epistemic morals, the success of false modeling assumptions, or widely termed postmodern criticisms of objectivity as evidence against scientific realisms. Some antirealists attempt to explain the success of scientific theories without reference to truth.
Read more about this topic: Philosophy Of Science
Famous quotes containing the words scientific realism, scientific and/or realism:
“Experimental work provides the strongest evidence for scientific realism. This is not because we test hypotheses about entities. It is because entities that in principle cannot be ‘observed’ are manipulated to produce a new phenomena
[sic] and to investigate other aspects of nature.”
—Ian Hacking (b. 1936)
“Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“While we look to the dramatist to give romance to realism, we ask of the actor to give realism to romance.”
—Oscar Wilde (1854–1900)