首页> 外文期刊>Perspectives on science >'Why These Laws?'— Multiverse Discourse as a Scene of Response
【24h】

'Why These Laws?'— Multiverse Discourse as a Scene of Response

机译:“为什么要有这些定律?” —多元话语作为回应的场景

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper traces the emergence of “why” questions in modern cosmology and the responding proliferation of multiverse discourse in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Critics who see speculative theorizing as delving into the metaphysical are not hard to find. George Ellis’ concern that we are entering a new era of ‘cosmological myth’ resonates with the 1937 debate regarding “cosmythology” and the shifting boundary between physics and metaphysics. However, the charge that multiverse proposals are nothing but speculative metaphysics can be considered in terms other than criteria relating to empirical testability. A historicist reading of what metaphysics represents in this context is presented in order to emphasize that “metaphysical” as a pejorative term in science discourse is a fluid and historically contingent concept. It appears that proposals are being considered metaphysical precisely when there is no consensus on what constitutes empirical testability. Drawing on the work of Nicholas Jardine, Hans-Jörg Rheinberger and Christopher Hookway, I argue that in cosmology during this period, particularly in relation to multiverse proposals, there appears a well-defined “scene of response”, rather than of fully-fledged inquiry. Thus, intelligible questions may be considered metaphysical, but not timelessly so.
机译:本文追溯了现代宇宙论中“为什么”问题的出现以及二十世纪后期和二十一世纪初多元宇宙话语的响应性扩散。认为投机理论是对形而上学的研究的批评家并不难找到。乔治·埃利斯(George Ellis)担心,我们正在进入“宇宙学神话”的新时代,这与1937年有关“宇宙神话学”以及物理学与形而上学之间不断变化的边界的辩论产生了共鸣。然而,除了与经验可检验性有关的标准外,可以认为多宇宙提议不过是投机形而上学的指控。提出了历史学家对形而上学在这种情况下代表的理解,以便强调“形而上学”作为科学语篇中的贬义性术语是一个流动的,历史上偶然的概念。看来,当关于什么构成经验可检验性尚无共识时,正好将提议视为形而上学。根据尼古拉斯·贾丁(Nicholas Jardine),汉斯·约格·莱茵伯格(Hans-JörgRheinberger)和克里斯托弗·霍克威(Christopher Hookway)的工作,我认为,在此期间的宇宙学中,特别是在涉及多宇宙提议时,出现了定义明确的“反应现场”,而不是成熟的查询。因此,可理解的问题可以被视为形而上学,但并非永恒。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Perspectives on science》 |2017年第3期|324-354|共31页
  • 作者

    Jacob Pearce;

  • 作者单位

    University of Melbourne;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:23:59

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号