首页> 外文期刊>Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. A >The electrons of the dinosaurs and the center of the Earth: comments on D.D. Turner's The past vs. the tiny: historical science and the abductive arguments for realism'
【24h】

The electrons of the dinosaurs and the center of the Earth: comments on D.D. Turner's The past vs. the tiny: historical science and the abductive arguments for realism'

机译:恐龙和地球中心的电子:D.D。的评论特纳的《过去与渺小:历史科学和现实主义的绑架论点》

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Turner [The past vs. the tiny: Historical science and the abductive arguments for realism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35A (2004) 1] claims that the arguments in favor of realism do not support with the same force both classes of realism, since they supply stronger reasons for experimental realism than for historical realism. I would like to make two comments, which should be seen as amplifications inspired by his proposal, rather than as a criticism. First, it is important to highlight that Turner's distinction between 'tiny' and 'past unobservables' is neither excluding nor exhaustive. Second, even if we agreed with everything that Turner says regarding the arguments for realism and their relative weight in order to justify the experimental or historical version, there is an aspect that Turner does not consider and that renders historical realism less problematic than experimental realism.
机译:Turner [过去与渺小:历史科学和现实主义的绑架论点。 《历史与科学哲学研究》 35A(2004)1]声称,支持现实主义的论据并没有以相同的力量来支持这两种现实主义,因为它们为实验现实主义提供了比历史现实主义更强大的理由。我想发表两点意见,这应该看作是他的建议所激发的放大,而不是批评。首先,重要的是要强调特纳在“微小”和“过去不可观察”之间的区别既不排除也不穷尽。其次,即使我们同意特纳所说的关于现实主义的论点及其相对权重的一切,以证明实验或历史版本的合理性,特纳也没有考虑到一个方面,这使历史现实主义比实验现实主义没有问题。

著录项

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