Université Clermont Auvergne, PHIER, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2021 Oct;89:235-247. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.08.007. Epub 2021 Sep 6.
The "universality" of critical phenomena is much discussed in philosophy of scientific explanation, idealizations and philosophy of physics. Lange and Reutlinger recently opposed Batterman concerning the role of some deliberate distortions in unifying a large class of phenomena, regardless of microscopic constitution. They argue for an essential explanatory role for "commonalities" rather than that of idealizations. Building on Batterman's insight, this article aims to show that assessing the differences between the universality of critical phenomena and two paradigmatic cases of "commonality strategy"-the ideal gas model and the harmonic oscillator model-is necessary to avoid the objections raised by Lange and Reutlinger. Taking these universal explanations as benchmarks for critical phenomena reveals the importance of the different roles played by analogies underlying the use of the models. A special combination of physical and formal analogies allows one to explain the epistemic autonomy of the universality of critical phenomena through an explicative loop.
在科学解释哲学、理想化和物理哲学中,临界现象的“普遍性”备受讨论。兰格和罗廷格最近反对巴特曼,认为在统一一大类现象时,无论微观构成如何,一些故意的扭曲都起到了作用。他们主张“共性”而不是理想化在解释中起着本质的作用。本文以巴特曼的洞察力为基础,旨在表明,评估临界现象的普遍性与两种典型的“共性策略”案例(理想气体模型和谐振子模型)之间的差异,对于避免兰格和罗廷格提出的反对意见是必要的。将这些普遍解释作为临界现象的基准,可以揭示模型使用中基础类比所扮演的不同角色的重要性。物理和形式类比的特殊组合允许通过解释循环来解释临界现象普遍性的认知自主性。