The primary concern of this piece of work is to reconsider scientific realism debate in the philosophy of science. Accordingly, the overall aim is to come up with the clues of a viable scientific realist attitude in the face of anti-realist interpretations of scientific theories. To accomplish this aim, I make use of two modified versions of scientific realism, that is, &lsquo / epistemic structural realism&rsquo / and &lsquo / entity realism&rsquo / . Epistemic structural realism is a realist position of which proponents claim that the only knowable part of the reality is the structure of it which is expressed by the mathematical equations of our best scientific theories. On the other hand, according to entity realism, the only assured knowledge obtained from scientific theories is the existence of theoretical entities posited by these theories. I argue that a combination of the properly construed versions of these two positions might fulfill the afore-mentioned aim of this thesis.

O objetivo principal desta tese é argumentar a favor da intuição básica do realismo científico, com o apoio de uma versão fortalecida e articulada do argumento do milagre. O realismo científico é uma concepção filosófica da ciência que assume uma atitude epistêmica otimista frente aos resultados da investigação científica que abrangem aspectos do mundo tanto observáveis como inobserváveis. Segundo o realismo científico, as entidades inobserváveis postuladas pelas teorias científicas bem-sucedidas têm existência real e essas teorias são verdadeiras ou aproximadamente verdadeiras. Essa atitude positiva é contestada por diversas perspectivas filosóficas conhecidas coletivamente como formas de antirrealismo científico (positivismo lógico, instrumentalismo, empirismo construtivo, historicismo, construtivismo social etc.). Procuramos analisar e rebater três importantes modalidades de argumentação antirrealista: a subdeterminação empírica das teorias, a indução pessimista e a circularidade viciosa da inferência da melhor explicação. Argumentamos que não obstante as diferenças que se mantêm entre as concepções realistas da ciência, o chamado argumento do milagre constitui uma peça central na defesa do realismo científico. Esse argumento se expressa na célebre formulação de Putnam (1975, p. 73), [...] o realismo científico é a única filosofia que não faz do sucesso da ciência um milagre. Para o realista científico, a ciência é bem-sucedida em explicar e prever fenômenos, inclusive novos, porque suas melhores teorias (maduras, não ad hoc, bem-sucedidas empírica e instrumentalmente, provedora de previsões novas, fecundas etc.) são (parcial ou aproximadamente) verdadeiras e as entidades inobserváveis postuladas por essas teorias realmente existem. Argumentamos também que outros esquemas de explicação para o êxito científico baseados em visões antirrealistas ou não-realistas da ciência são insatisfatórios. Examinamos diversas formas de fortalecer o argumento do milagre mediante as qualificações de novidade preditiva e fecundidade teórica, e concluímos que esse argumento continua sendo basilar e estratégico na defesa do realismo científico. / The main objective of this thesis is to argue in favor of the basic intuition of scientific realism, with the support of a strengthened and articulated version of the miracle argument. Scientific realism is a philosophical conception of science that takes an optimistic epistemic attitude towards the results of scientific research concerning both observable and unobservable aspects of the world. According to scientific realism, the unobservable entities postulated by successful scientific theories actually exist, and these theories are true or approximately true. This positive attitude is challenged by various philosophical perspectives known collectively as forms of scientific antirealism (logical positivism, instrumentalism, constructive empiricism, historicism, social constructivism, etc.). We analyze and rebut three important modalities of the antirealist argument: empirical underdetermination of theories, pessimistic induction, and the vicious circularity of inference to the best explanation. We argue that despite the differences that remain between the realist conceptions of science, the so-called miracle argument is a centerpiece in the defense of scientific realism. This argument is expressed in Putnams famous formulation (1975a, p. 73): [...] realism is the only philosophy that doesnt make the success of the science a miracle. For the scientific realist, science is successful in explaining and predicting phenomena, including new ones, because its best theories (mature, not ad hoc, successful empirically and instrumentally, providing new forecasts, fruitful, etc.) are (partially or approximately) true and the unobservable entities postulated by these theories really exist. We also argue that other schemes of explanation of scientific success, based on antirealist or non-realist views of science, are unsatisfactory. We examine various ways of strengthening the miracle argument based on the notions of predictive novelty and theoretical fruitfulness, and we conclude that this argument remains fundamental and strategic in the defense of scientific realism.

Este trabalho é uma tentativa de reconstrução metodológica parcial do pensamento de Herbert Blumer e de seu interacionismo simbólico sob a luz da polêmica entre causalidade e compreensão, que emerge no seio das discussões acerca da natureza das explicações nas ciências sociais. Assim, tem-se enfocado principalmente sua tese de doutorado, Method in Social Psychology, a fim de deslindar a concatenação dos elementos explícitos e implícitos de fundamentação ontológica, epistemológica e lógica em um esquema-base compreensivo. Com ele, pretende-se analisar mais detalhadamente o modo como o pensamento de Blumer se estrutura metateoricamente e como o impasse de suas reflexões teóricas vêm a incorrer em problemáticas contidas nessa estrutura. Ao final, tem-se indicado um passo de uma mera reconstrução analítico-descritiva, tateando em Weber, Schütz e no realismo científico as bases para um desenvolvimento analítico-crítico de sua metateoria compreensiva. / This work is an attempt to a partial reconstruction of the methodological thinking of Herbert Blumer and its symbolic interactionism in the light of the controversy between causality and understanding. This controversy emerges within discussions about the nature of explanation in the social sciences. Thus, we have focused mainly on his doctoral thesis, Method in Social Psychology, in order to disentangle the concatenation of the explicit and implicit elements of ontological, epistemological and logical reasoning in his metatheoretical scheme of understanding. With it, we intend to analyze in more detail how the thought of Blumer is metatheoretically structured and how the dilemma of its theoretical reflections come to incur in problematic issues contained in this structure. At the end, it has been indicated a next step from a mere analytical-descriptive reconstruction, groping Weber, Schütz and the scientific realism as basis for an analytical-critical development of its metatheory of understanding

Este trabalho é uma tentativa de reconstrução metodológica parcial do pensamento de Herbert Blumer e de seu interacionismo simbólico sob a luz da polêmica entre causalidade e compreensão, que emerge no seio das discussões acerca da natureza das explicações nas ciências sociais. Assim, tem-se enfocado principalmente sua tese de doutorado, Method in Social Psychology, a fim de deslindar a concatenação dos elementos explícitos e implícitos de fundamentação ontológica, epistemológica e lógica em um esquema-base compreensivo. Com ele, pretende-se analisar mais detalhadamente o modo como o pensamento de Blumer se estrutura metateoricamente e como o impasse de suas reflexões teóricas vêm a incorrer em problemáticas contidas nessa estrutura. Ao final, tem-se indicado um passo de uma mera reconstrução analítico-descritiva, tateando em Weber, Schütz e no realismo científico as bases para um desenvolvimento analítico-crítico de sua metateoria compreensiva. / This work is an attempt to a partial reconstruction of the methodological thinking of Herbert Blumer and its symbolic interactionism in the light of the controversy between causality and understanding. This controversy emerges within discussions about the nature of explanation in the social sciences. Thus, we have focused mainly on his doctoral thesis, Method in Social Psychology, in order to disentangle the concatenation of the explicit and implicit elements of ontological, epistemological and logical reasoning in his metatheoretical scheme of understanding. With it, we intend to analyze in more detail how the thought of Blumer is metatheoretically structured and how the dilemma of its theoretical reflections come to incur in problematic issues contained in this structure. At the end, it has been indicated a next step from a mere analytical-descriptive reconstruction, groping Weber, Schütz and the scientific realism as basis for an analytical-critical development of its metatheory of understanding

<p>In the village'of Citing in the northern highlands of Tanzania, the factors: social stratification, land tenure, production strategies, investment patterns and the economic uncertainties of society are studied and their relationship to land degradation is examined. The main assumption of the study is that the causes of land degradation are so complex that a methodology that emphasises contextualisation has to be used. A methodological framework that considers inter-linkages between all these factors is developed and tested. The result of the test shows that contextualisation gives a more in-depth and complex explanation than conventional, positivist research. The study gives a detailed account of the relationship that various wealth groups have to land and land degradation in the village. It is found that all wealth groups are destructive to the land but in varying ways. The rich farmers are over-cultivating land marginal to agriculture, the middle peasants have too many cattle in the village while the poor peasants are so marginalised socially that they hardly influence land management. Those identified as having economic as well as social incentives to maintain soil fertility are the middle peasants, while the rich farmers are shown to be consciously soil-mining the former grazing areas.</p>

In the village'of Citing in the northern highlands of Tanzania, the factors: social stratification, land tenure, production strategies, investment patterns and the economic uncertainties of society are studied and their relationship to land degradation is examined. The main assumption of the study is that the causes of land degradation are so complex that a methodology that emphasises contextualisation has to be used. A methodological framework that considers inter-linkages between all these factors is developed and tested. The result of the test shows that contextualisation gives a more in-depth and complex explanation than conventional, positivist research. The study gives a detailed account of the relationship that various wealth groups have to land and land degradation in the village. It is found that all wealth groups are destructive to the land but in varying ways. The rich farmers are over-cultivating land marginal to agriculture, the middle peasants have too many cattle in the village while the poor peasants are so marginalised socially that they hardly influence land management. Those identified as having economic as well as social incentives to maintain soil fertility are the middle peasants, while the rich farmers are shown to be consciously soil-mining the former grazing areas.

Mokslinis realizmas yra filosofinis požiūris tvirtinantis, kad mokslo teorijos teigia tiesą apie pasaulį. Šis požiūris nebūtų filosofiškai įdomus, jei jo nesiektų paneigti įvairūs filosofiniai, istoriniai ir sociologiniai kontrargumentai. Šiame darbe analizuojami Paulo Feyerabendo, Arthuro Fine‘o, Thomo S. Kuhno, Larry Laudano, Baso van Fraasseno bei socialinio konstruktyvizmo prieš mokslinį realizmą nukreipti argumentai. Vertinama, kaip šie argumentai atsilaiko prieš naujausius argumentus mokslinio realizmo naudai, pateiktus Philipo Kitcherio, Jarretto Leplino, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Stathiso Psillos ir kitų mokslinių realistų darbuose. Darbe teigiama, kad mokslinis realizmas yra nuoseklus, savo teiginius gerai pagrindžiantis, geriausiai mokslo sėkmę paaiškinantis mokslo teorijų aiškinimas ir todėl laikytinas teisingu teorinis požiūris. Mokslinis realizmas yra nuoseklus teorinis požiūris, kadangi pagrįsdamas dvi prielaidas, kad egzistuoja nuo mąstymo nepriklausomas ir tam tikrą struktūrą turintis pasaulis (ontologinė prielaida) bei kad mokslas yra pajėgus šį pasaulį pažinti (episteminė prielaida), daro išvadą apie mokslo teorijų semantiką, jog teorijos parodo, koks yra pasaulis. Mokslinis realizmas gerai pagrindžia savo teiginius ir prieš jį nukreipti argumentai nepajėgia jo paneigti. Savąjį episteminį optimizmą mokslinis realizmas pagrindžia neigdamas galimybę nubrėžti griežtą ribą tarp stebimų ir negalimų stebėti esinių ir reiškinių bei tvirtindamas abdukcijos (geriausio... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Scientific realism is a philosophical approach that claims the literal truth of scientific theories. This approach would not be philosophically interesting if there were not ample philosophical, historical and sociological arguments that would argue against it. In this thesis we evaluate the arguments of Paul Feyerabend, Arthur Fine, Thomas S. Kuhn, Larry Laudan and Bas van Fraassen as well as the challenge of social constructivists. All the counterarguments are weighed against the most up-to-date arguments for scientific realism – notably, Philip Kitcher, Jarrett Leplin, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Stathis Psillos and others. We claim that scientific realism is a consistent and soundly substantiated account of scientific theories which best explains the empirical success of scientific theories and which, therefore, is justly believed to be a truthful theoretical attitude. Scientific realism is a consistent theoretical attitude because it starts from the two premises that there is a mind independent world of a particular structure (an ontological premise) and that science is able to know this world (an epistemic premise) and concludes with a semantic thesis that scientific theories represent what the world is like. Scientific realism is a sound and well substantiated theoretical attitude because the arguments against it do not succeed to refute it. It grounds its epistemic optimism in the denial to draw a rigid line between the observable and unobservable aspects of the world and in... [to full text]

The topic of this diploma thesis is the position of scientific realism presented in the framework of naturalized philosophy of science. The aim is to clarify this position and to show that if one denies realism, scientific practice does not make sense. For this purpose main focus is first devoted to the key parts (metaphysical realism, semantic realism, and epistemological realism) which constitute the scientific realism. Next, a detailed analysis of the arguments against and in favor of realism is offered, and concrete examples taken from the sciences are used to illustrate key points. Space is also devoted to the analysis of a physical theory of heat of the 18th and 19th centuries in connection with an antirealist argument directed at the history of science. Also, one of the few fully elaborated antirealist positions, constructive empiricism, is presented and critically evaluated. In a similar fashion, this thesis pays attention to a specific form of realism, called entity realism. Though the resulting image is a thoroughly realist position, this position strives to accurately capture the numerous nuances of the scientific practice, offering a fresh perspective on some of the traditional views.

Le fait même de nous engager dans un projet explicatif, que nous nommons canoniquement philosophique, nous convoque à ce présupposé de l’affinité entre langage et monde. Nous proposons dans l’introduction une approche cohérentiste des systèmes philosophiques, définis comme des visions du monde où ontologie et épistémologie se doivent un support mutuel. Les positions épistémologiques de Locke, définies par son empirisme, sont juxtaposées à une conception corpusculaire de la réalité. Nous montrerons que les tensions qui existent entre ces deux positionnements sont consolidées par une attitude doxastique profondément réaliste, aboutissant à la fameuse thèse de la ressemblances des qualités primaires réelles et perçues. La science de l’époque est ainsi promue par une ligne rationaliste d’une affinité profonde entre ces catégories qui nous rendent intelligible notre environnement et la réalité même. Le naturalisme contemporain s’appuie quant à lui tout entier sur l’intelligibilité que nous avons du réel au travers de l’activité scientifique, fondant dès lors une résurgence de l’ontologie comme cet idéal d’une accessibilité rationnelle du réel, par le biais de procédures largement a priori, que nos sciences affleurent. Si les prétentions des métaphysiciens à pouvoir remplir cet objectif au moyen de préconceptions ontologiques doivent être déçues, il paraît plus juste de valoriser l’a priori mathématique qui, pace le modèle du réseau holiste de Quine, semble empiriquement incorrigible. Son efficacité ‘déraisonnable’ dans l’heuristique de nos sciences fondamentales le place en première ligne dans la constitution des différentes strates d’objectivation de notre environnement. / The very fact of being engaged in an explicative program, canonically called philosophical, calls us to this presupposition of an affinity between world and words. We propose in the introduction a coherentist approach to philosophical systems, defined as worldviews where ontology and epistemology are in charge of mutual support. In Locke’s empiricism, the epistemological line defined by his empiricism is coupled to a corpuscularist conception of reality. We’ll show that the lines of tension existing between those two positions are consolidated by a deeply realistic doxastic attitude, bringing to the famous thesis of the likeness between real and perceived first qualities. The science of that time is thus promoted by a rationalist line of a deep affinity between the categories that make our environment intelligible and the very reality. Today’s naturalism leans entirely on the intelligibility that we have of reality through scientific activities, so founding the reappearance of ontology as this ideal of rational access to reality, by means of largely a priori procedures, that our sciences flush. If the pretentions of the metaphysicians to meet those objectives have to be deceived, it seems more judicious to value the mathematical a priori which, pace Quine’s model of the seamless web of belief, seems empirically incorrigible. It’s unreasonable effectiveness in the heuristics of our fundamental sciences places effectively it in the very first line in the constitution of the different strata of objectivation of our environnement

This thesis addresses key issues of scientific realism in the philosophy of biology and chemistry through investigation of an underexplored research domain: olfaction theory, or the science of smell. It also provides the first systematic overview of the development of olfactory practices and research into the molecular basis of odours across the 19th and 20th century. Historical and contemporary explanations and modelling techniques for understanding the material basis of odours are analysed with a specific focus on the entrenchment of technological process, research tradition and the definitions of materiality for understanding scientific advancement. The thesis seeks to make sense of the explanatory and problem solving strategies, different ways of reasoning and the construction of facts by drawing attention to the role and application of scientific representations in olfactory practices. Scientific representations such as models, classifications, maps, diagrams, lists etc. serve a variety of purposes that range from the stipulation of relevant properties and correlations of the research materials and the systematic formation of research questions, to the design of experiments that explore or test particular hypotheses. By examining a variety of modelling strategies in olfactory research, I elaborate on how I understand the relation between representations and the world and why this relation requires a pluralist perspective on scientific models, methods and practices. Through this work I will show how a plurality of representations does not pose a problem for realism about scientific entities and their theoretical contexts but, on the contrary, that this plurality serves as the most reliable grounding for a realistic interpretation of scientific representations of the world and the entities it contains. The thesis concludes that scientific judgement has to be understood through its disciplinary trajectory, and that scientific pluralism is a direct consequence of the historicity of scientific development.