2021•Unpublished venueRequires access

Structure not Selection

James Ladyman

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

Abstract This chapter argues that structural realism should not be thought of as a form of selective realism, because the latter involves criteria that ought to be applicable to our best current theories to select in advance what of their ontology will be preserved. Neither epistemic nor ontic structural realism (OSR) offer such criteria. Ontic structural realism is a metaphysics that also responds to ontological problems for scientific realism other than the problem of theory-change. These include the lack of a fundamental level and scale-relativity. The theory of real patterns addresses these problems, emphasizing the centrality of the idea of objective modal structure that makes OSR a form of realism and differentiates it from van Fraassen’s structural empiricism, making an account of causation and other modal aspects of scientific knowledge possible. The chapter concludes with some remarks about the relationship between structural realism and the historiography of science.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract This chapter argues that structural realism should not be thought of as a form of selective realism, because the latter involves criteria that ought to be applicable to our best current theories to select in advance what of their ontology will be preserved. Neither epistemic nor ontic structural realism (OSR) offer such criteria. Ontic structural realism is a metaphysics that also responds to ontological problems for scientific realism other than the problem of theory-change. These include the lack of a fundamental level and scale-relativity. The theory of real patterns addresses these problems, emphasizing the centrality of the idea of objective modal structure that makes OSR a form of realism and differentiates it from van Fraassen’s structural empiricism, making an account of causation and other modal aspects of scientific knowledge possible. The chapter concludes with some remarks about the relationship between structural realism and the historiography of science.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract This chapter argues that structural realism should not be thought of as a form of selective realism, because the latter involves criteria that ought to be applicable to our best current theories to select in advance what of their ontology will be preserved. Neither epistemic nor ontic structural realism (OSR) offer such criteria. Ontic structural realism is a metaphysics that also responds to ontological problems for scientific realism other than the problem of theory-change. These include the lack of a fundamental level and scale-relativity. The theory of real patterns addresses these problems, emphasizing the centrality of the idea of objective modal structure that makes OSR a form of realism and differentiates it from van Fraassen’s structural empiricism, making an account of causation and other modal aspects of scientific knowledge possible. The chapter concludes with some remarks about the relationship between structural realism and the historiography of science.

Key concepts: Ontic, Epistemology, Scientific realism, Realism, Critical realism (philosophy of perception), Philosophy, Metaphysics, Causation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Structure not Selection — Research Paper | ScholarLens