Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front. Philos. China    2014, Vol. 9 Issue (3) : 431-440     https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-003-014-0036-2
research-article |
Scientific Realism and the Meanings of Theoretical Terms
YUGUO Fei()
YUGUO Fei
Download: PDF(222 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In contemporary philosophy of science, there are many interesting arguments for and against scientific realism with regard to the meaningfulness and truthfulness of theoretical statements. Some anti-realists hold that since many important concepts in scientific theories have no specific referents, the relevant theoretical statements are therefore either false or meaningless. In this essay, I join the debates concerning the plausibility of scientific realism by focusing on two intertwined issues: first, that of how we can we explicate the meaningfulness of theoretical statements, especially statements pertaining to unobservable objects, and second, that of the meaningfulness of theoretical statements for our acceptance of scientific realism.

Keywords theoretical terms      reference      truth      scientific realism     
Issue Date: 23 September 2014
 Cite this article:   
YUGUO Fei. Scientific Realism and the Meanings of Theoretical Terms[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(3): 431-440.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-003-014-0036-2
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2014/V9/I3/431
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
YUGUO Fei
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] ZHANG Junguo. A Critical Examination of Anselm’s Ontological Argument[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 137-150.
[2] MOU Bo. On the Double-Reference Character of “Hexagram” Names in the Yijing: Engaging Fregean&Kripkean Approaches to the Issue of How Reference Is Possible[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(4): 523-537.
[3] GUO Peng. The Semantic Function of Descriptions Associated with Proper Names: Comments on Kripke’s Criticism of Searle[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(2): 268-279.
[4] Gerry Coulter. The Embrace of Radical Philosophical Emptiness as a Liberating Conceptualization of Thought in Roland Barthes and Jean Baudrillard[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(2): 194-212.
[5] WEI Yanxia. Why Logical Revisabilism Is Wrong[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(3): 507-517.
[6] WANG Wenfang. Filtering Theories of Truth: Compositionality as a Criterion[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(1): 156-170.
[7] CHEN Xiaoping. Sense and Reference of Predicates: Comments on Frege’s Theory of Sense-Reference[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2012, 7(2): 270-283.
[8] CHEN Zhen. Why We Care Whether Our Beliefs Are True: An Answer to Stephen Stich?[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2012, 7(1): 142-153.
[9] WANG Wenfang. Against Classical Dialetheism[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(3): 492-500.
[10] James O. YOUNG, . Truth, correspondence and deflationism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2009, 4(4): 563-575.
[11] SUN Si. A critique of relativism in the sociology of scientific knowledge[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2007, 2(1): 115-130.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed