Evolutionary Approach to Realism

Document Type : علمی - پژوهشی

Authors

1 PhD student in Philosophy of Science, Department of Law, Theology and Political Science, Research Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Philosophy of Science, Department of Law, Theology and Political Science, Research Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Common sense realism and scientific realism are two metaphysical thesis. The former accepts the existence of the observable entities of common sense knowledge and the later accepts the unobservable entities necessary for the well-established scientific theories. Common sense realism and scientific realism are defended or rejected by some philosophers with reliance on the evolutionary approach. Studying these arguments shows there are positive evidences to the advantage of both subjects; realism and anti-realism, But skeptical consequences of evolutionary approach to science is a source for a new idea to specify science and to develop the scientific epistemology. In this article، in addition to investigating the above local reasonings to the advantage of Van Fraasson's evolutionary explanation will be adopted for science and scientific epistemology growth on the basis of specifying evolutionary; the third position which between realism and belief in miracle is in specifying the success of science. In this approach, the evolutionary approach, the production of resistant and abiding models is the main goal of science and philosophy and the scientific realism is also one of the abiding models.

Keywords

References

  1. Bushnell, I.W.R. (2001), “Mother’s Face Recognition in Newborn Infants: Learning and Memory”, Infant and Child Development, 10, pp. 67–74.
  2. Campbell, Donald T. (1974), “Evolutionary Epistemology”, In: Schlipp, Paul A. (ed.), the Philosophy of Karl Popper, Vol. I, 413-459. Illinois: La Salle.
  3. Devvitt, Michae (2005) “Scientific Realism”, in Frank Jackson and Michael Smith (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Analytic Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 767–91.
  4. Fine, Arthur (1986a), The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  5. Glass, B. (1979), “Milestones and rates of growth in the development of biology”, Quarterly Review of Biology, 54, 31–53.
  6. Guthrie, S. (1993), “Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion”, NewYork: Oxford University Press.
  7. Helen De Cruz, Maarten Boudry, Johan De Smed, Stefaan Blancke. (2011), “Evolutionary Approaches to Epistemic Justification”, Dialectica, Vol. 65, No. 4, pp. 517–535.
  8. Hull, David L. 1988. Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  9. Kitcher, P. (1993), 7’he Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Laudan, L. (1984), “Realism without the Real”, Philosophy of Science, 51, 156-162.
  11. McKay, R.T. and Dennett, D.C. (2009), “The Evolution of Misbelieve”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, pp. 493–510.
  12. Popper, K. R. (1971), Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  13. Price, G. (1972), “Extension of Covariance Selection Mathematics”, Annals of Human Genetics, 35, 485–490.
  14. Putnam, H. (1975). Mathematics, matter and method: Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Putnam, H. (1983) Realism and Reason. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Sage J. (2003), “Truth-Reliability and the Evolution of Human Cognitive Faculties”, Philos. Stud. 00: 95–106.
  17. Shaffer, M. (2008), "Bayesianism, convergence and social epistemology." Episteme, 5, 203–219.
  18. Stanford, P. K. (2000), “An Anti-Realist Explanation for the Success of Science”, Philosophy of Science, 67(2), 266–284.
  19. Stephens C. (2001), “When Is It Selectively Advantageous to Have True Beliefs?”, Sandwiching the Better Safe than Sorry Argument, Philos. Stud. 105: 161–189.
  20. Sterelny K. (2003), Thought in a Hostile World: The Evolution of Human Cognition, Blackwell, Oxford.
  21. Stich, S. (1990), The Fragmentation of Reason, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  22. Thomson, Paul. (1995), “Evolutionary Epistemology and Scientific Realism”, Joumal of Social and Evolurionary Systems, 18(2):165-191.
  23. Van Fraassen, B. (1980), Scientific Image, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Wa¨gner-Dobler, R., & Berg, J. (1999). Physics 1800–1900: "A quantitative outline." Scientometrics, 46, 213–285.
  25. Wray, K. Brad. (2010), “Selection and Predictive Success”, Erkenn, 72:365–377.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics