Scientific Representations as Limiting Cases

Citation data:

Erkenntnis, ISSN: 0165-0106, Vol: 76, Issue: 1, Page: 73-89

Publication Year:
2012
Usage 321
Downloads 293
Abstract Views 23
Full Text Views 5
Captures 1
Exports-Saves 1
Social Media 2
Tweets 1
Shares, Likes & Comments 1
Citations 1
Citation Indexes 1
Repository URL:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/9001
DOI:
10.1007/s10670-011-9309-8
Author(s):
Ducheyne, Steffen
Publisher(s):
Springer Nature
Tags:
Arts and Humanities, Mathematics
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
article description
In this essay, I shall show that the so-called inferential (Suárez 2003 and 2004) and interpretational (Contessa 2007) accounts of scientific representation are respectively unsatisfactory and too weak to account for scientific representation (pars destruens). Along the way, I shall also argue that the pragmatic similarity (Giere 2004 and Giere 2010) and the partial isomorphism (da Costa and French 2003 and French 2003) accounts are unable to single out scientific representation. In the pars construens I spell out a limiting case account which has explanatory surplus vis à vis the approaches which I have previously reviewed. My account offers an adequate treatment of scientific representation, or so I shall try to argue. Central to my account is the notion of a pragmatic limiting case, which will be characterized in due course. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

This article has 0 Wikipedia mention.