A new argument for scientific realism
| dc.contributor.author | Forbes, Curtis Joseph | |
| dc.contributor.supervisor | Foss, Jeffrey E. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-04-12T18:26:22Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-04-12T18:26:22Z | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2008 | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2010-04-12T18:26:22Z | |
| dc.degree.department | Department of Philosophy | |
| dc.degree.level | Master of Arts M.A. | en |
| dc.description.abstract | The debate between scientific realism and constructive empiricism is often cast in terms of a debate over what it is "rational" to accept about successful scientific theories. I cast this debate differently: I place these conflicting philosophies of science within our current political context, asking the question "which of these philosophies gives us the conceptual tools we need to allow science to adequately inform our public policy decisions?" I argue that most cases of long-term planning based on current science. such as curbing carbon emissions based on global warming theory. are decisions that can only be made if we approach scientific theories realistically. This vindicates the project of developing a realist epistemology, for only by inquiring into the truth with respect to unobservables can we make adequately informed public policy decisions. | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1828/2563 | |
| dc.language | English | eng |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.rights | Available to the World Wide Web | en |
| dc.subject | Scientific realism | en |
| dc.subject | Constructive empiricism | en |
| dc.subject.lcsh | UVic Subject Index::Humanities and Social Sciences::Philosophy | en |
| dc.title | A new argument for scientific realism | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | en |