Redundant epistemic symmetries

Q1 Arts and Humanities

Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics Pub Date : 2020-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.shpsb.2020.03.002

James Read, Thomas Møller-Nielsen

引用次数: 16

Abstract

We undertake a detailed analysis of three ‘epistemic’ approaches to symmetries, due, respectively, to Ismael and van Fraassen, Caulton, and Dasgupta. Finding faults with each, we proceed to develop our own epistemic approach to symmetries. Having done so, we present a concern regarding all epistemic accounts: they render the notion of a symmetry transformation redundant as a tool for metaphysical theorising about scientific theories.

查看原文本刊更多论文

冗余的认知对称性

我们对Ismael和van Fraassen、Caulton和Dasgupta提出的三种对称的“认识论”方法进行了详细分析。找到每一个错误，我们继续发展我们自己的认识方法的对称性。在这样做之后，我们提出了对所有认识论的关注:它们使对称变换的概念成为关于科学理论的形而上学理论化的多余工具。

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

Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 物理-科学史与科学哲学

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

13.3 weeks

期刊介绍： Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics is devoted to all aspects of the history and philosophy of modern physics broadly understood, including physical aspects of astronomy, chemistry and other non-biological sciences. The primary focus is on physics from the mid/late-nineteenth century to the present, the period of emergence of the kind of theoretical physics that has come to dominate the exact sciences in the twentieth century. The journal is internationally oriented with contributions from a wide range of perspectives. In addition to purely historical or philosophical papers, the editors particularly encourage papers that combine these two disciplines. The editors are also keen to publish papers of interest to physicists, as well as specialists in history and philosophy of physics.