The threefold evaluation of theories: a synopsis of from instrumentalism to constructive realism. On some relations between confirmation, empirical progress, and truth approximation (2000)

T. Kuipers
{"title":"The threefold evaluation of theories: a synopsis of from instrumentalism to constructive realism. On some relations between confirmation, empirical progress, and truth approximation (2000)","authors":"T. Kuipers","doi":"10.1163/9789401201285_003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Surprisingly enough, modified versions of the confirmation theory of Carnap and Hempel and the truth approximation theory of Popper turn out to be smoothly synthesizable. The glue between confirmation and truth approximation appears to be the instrumentalist methodology, rather than the falsificationist one. By evaluating theories separately and comparatively in terms of their successes and problems (hence even if they are already falsified), the instrumentalist methodology provides - both in theory and in practice - the straight route for short-term empirical progress in science in the spirit of Laudan. However, it is argued that such progress is also functional for all kinds of truth approximation: observational, referential, and theoretical. This sheds new light on the long-term dynamic of science and hence on the relation between the main epistemological positions, viz., instrumentalism (Toulmin, Laudan), constructive empiricism (van Fraassen), referential realism (Hacking and Cartwright), and theory realism of a nonessentialist nature (Popper), here called constructive realism. In From Instrumentalism to Constructive Realism (2000) the above story is presented in great detail. The present synopsis highlights the main ways of theory evaluation presented in that book, viz. evaluation in terms of confirmation (or falsification), empirical progress and truth approximation.","PeriodicalId":117860,"journal":{"name":"Poznán studies in the philosophy of the sciences and the humanities","volume":"132 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poznán studies in the philosophy of the sciences and the humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401201285_003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Surprisingly enough, modified versions of the confirmation theory of Carnap and Hempel and the truth approximation theory of Popper turn out to be smoothly synthesizable. The glue between confirmation and truth approximation appears to be the instrumentalist methodology, rather than the falsificationist one. By evaluating theories separately and comparatively in terms of their successes and problems (hence even if they are already falsified), the instrumentalist methodology provides - both in theory and in practice - the straight route for short-term empirical progress in science in the spirit of Laudan. However, it is argued that such progress is also functional for all kinds of truth approximation: observational, referential, and theoretical. This sheds new light on the long-term dynamic of science and hence on the relation between the main epistemological positions, viz., instrumentalism (Toulmin, Laudan), constructive empiricism (van Fraassen), referential realism (Hacking and Cartwright), and theory realism of a nonessentialist nature (Popper), here called constructive realism. In From Instrumentalism to Constructive Realism (2000) the above story is presented in great detail. The present synopsis highlights the main ways of theory evaluation presented in that book, viz. evaluation in terms of confirmation (or falsification), empirical progress and truth approximation.
理论的三重评价:从工具主义到建构现实主义概述。论确证、经验进步与真值逼近的若干关系(2000)
令人惊讶的是,卡尔纳普和亨佩尔的确认理论的修正版本和波普尔的真理逼近理论被证明是可以顺利综合的。确认和真理近似之间的粘合剂似乎是工具主义方法论,而不是证伪主义方法论。通过对理论的成功和问题(因此,即使它们已经被证伪)进行单独和比较的评估,工具主义方法论在理论上和实践上都为科学的短期经验进步提供了一条符合劳丹精神的直接途径。然而,有人认为,这种进步也适用于所有类型的真理近似:观测的、参考的和理论的。这揭示了科学的长期动态,从而揭示了主要认识论立场之间的关系,即工具主义(图尔敏,劳丹),建构经验主义(范·弗拉森),参考现实主义(哈金和卡特赖特)和非本质主义性质的理论现实主义(波普尔),在这里被称为建构现实主义。在《从工具主义到建构现实主义》(2000)一书中,上面的故事非常详细。本概要着重介绍了该书中提出的理论评价的主要方法,即确认(或证伪)评价、经验进步评价和真理逼近评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信