Nagelian reduction and approximation

IF 1.5 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Bohang Chen
{"title":"Nagelian reduction and approximation","authors":"Bohang Chen","doi":"10.1007/s13194-025-00633-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Critics frequently target Ernest Nagel’s model of reduction for its purported inadequacy in addressing the issue of approximation. In response, proponents of Nagel’s model have integrated approximations into the more comprehensive Generalized Nagel-Schaffner model, or the GNS model. However, this article contends that the pertinent criticisms and responses are both misplaced: There are no barriers to Nagel’s model incorporating approximations, and it assimilates them in a manner distinctly dissimilar to the approach of the GNS model. Indeed, Nagel’s model is fundamentally <i>static</i>, providing invariant formal and informal conditions for reduction; and it is the <i>dynamic</i> history of science that fulfills relevant conditions for reduction, thereby achieving different <i>degrees of reductive success</i>. Consequently, approximations are essentially extraneous to Nagel’s model, since they pertain chiefly to temporally based scientific knowledge and concern merely the <i>means</i> (e.g., approximate or exact deductions) of fulfilling the conditions for reduction within specific problem contexts. This article also develops a Nagelian treatment of approximation, demonstrating how distinctive types of approximations aid in fulfilling various conditions for reduction and contribute to different degrees of reductive success. Two case studies are presented to illustrate the Nagelian treatment: The first examines the specific heat ratio anomaly within the traditional endeavor of reducing thermodynamics to statistical mechanics, and the second addresses the consumption puzzle in the context of reducing macroeconomics to microeconomics.</p>","PeriodicalId":48832,"journal":{"name":"European Journal for Philosophy of Science","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal for Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-025-00633-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Critics frequently target Ernest Nagel’s model of reduction for its purported inadequacy in addressing the issue of approximation. In response, proponents of Nagel’s model have integrated approximations into the more comprehensive Generalized Nagel-Schaffner model, or the GNS model. However, this article contends that the pertinent criticisms and responses are both misplaced: There are no barriers to Nagel’s model incorporating approximations, and it assimilates them in a manner distinctly dissimilar to the approach of the GNS model. Indeed, Nagel’s model is fundamentally static, providing invariant formal and informal conditions for reduction; and it is the dynamic history of science that fulfills relevant conditions for reduction, thereby achieving different degrees of reductive success. Consequently, approximations are essentially extraneous to Nagel’s model, since they pertain chiefly to temporally based scientific knowledge and concern merely the means (e.g., approximate or exact deductions) of fulfilling the conditions for reduction within specific problem contexts. This article also develops a Nagelian treatment of approximation, demonstrating how distinctive types of approximations aid in fulfilling various conditions for reduction and contribute to different degrees of reductive success. Two case studies are presented to illustrate the Nagelian treatment: The first examines the specific heat ratio anomaly within the traditional endeavor of reducing thermodynamics to statistical mechanics, and the second addresses the consumption puzzle in the context of reducing macroeconomics to microeconomics.

Nagelian约简和近似
批评家们经常针对欧内斯特·内格尔的简化模型,因为它在解决近似问题上的不足。作为回应,纳格尔模型的支持者已经将近似值整合到更全面的广义纳格尔-沙夫纳模型或GNS模型中。然而,本文认为,相关的批评和回应都是错位的:内格尔的模型结合近似没有任何障碍,而且它以一种与GNS模型截然不同的方式吸收了近似。事实上,内格尔的模型基本上是静态的,为约简提供了不变的正式和非正式条件;正是科学的动态历史满足了还原的相关条件,从而取得了不同程度的还原成功。因此,近似基本上与Nagel的模型无关,因为它们主要与基于时间的科学知识有关,并且仅仅关注在特定问题背景下满足简化条件的手段(例如,近似或精确的演绎)。本文还发展了Nagelian对近似的处理,演示了不同类型的近似如何有助于满足各种简化条件,并有助于不同程度的简化成功。本文提出了两个案例研究来说明Nagelian的处理方法:第一个案例研究了将热力学还原为统计力学的传统努力中的比热比异常,第二个案例解决了将宏观经济学还原为微观经济学背景下的消费难题。
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
European Journal for Philosophy of Science
European Journal for Philosophy of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The European Journal for Philosophy of Science publishes groundbreaking works that can deepen understanding of the concepts and methods of the sciences, as they explore increasingly many facets of the world we live in. It is of direct interest to philosophers of science coming from different perspectives, as well as scientists, citizens and policymakers. The journal is interested in articles from all traditions and all backgrounds, as long as they engage with the sciences in a constructive, and critical, way. The journal represents the various longstanding European philosophical traditions engaging with the sciences, but welcomes articles from every part of the world.
×
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