Gentile Nélida, Lucero Susana
University of Buenos Aires, Department of Philosophy, Puán 480, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2024 Feb;103:168-175. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.12.005. Epub 2024 Jan 8.
In a series of articles, Mauricio Suárez defends the neutrality of fictionalism with respect to the scientific realism-anti-realism debate. Suárez understands fictionalism from a strictly methodological point of view, linked to the practice of model building in the context of the philosophy of science. He moves away from the type of fictionalism analysed in other areas of philosophy such as metaphysics, the philosophy of language, aesthetics or the philosophy of mathematics. Following Vaihinger's position, he emphasizes the inferential role of fiction in scientific modelling and argues that scientific fictionalism is not incompatible with scientific realism, as is often believed. We argue against Suárez's position and reject the ubiquitous character assigned to fictions in scientific discourse, as well as the deflationary view of scientific realism defended by Suárez. We conclude that when the semantic, epistemic, and metaphysical aspects at stake in the realism-antirealism debate are taken into account, the alleged compatibility between scientific realism and fictionalism starts to generate some tension.
在一系列文章中,毛里西奥·苏亚雷斯为虚构主义在科学实在论与反实在论之争中的中立性进行辩护。苏亚雷斯从严格的方法论角度理解虚构主义,这与科学哲学背景下的模型构建实践相关联。他摒弃了在形而上学、语言哲学、美学或数学哲学等其他哲学领域中所分析的那种虚构主义类型。遵循瓦伊欣格尔的立场,他强调虚构在科学建模中的推理作用,并认为科学虚构主义与科学实在论并非如人们通常所认为的那样不相容。我们反对苏亚雷斯的立场,拒绝接受赋予科学话语中虚构无所不在的特性,以及苏亚雷斯所捍卫的科学实在论的紧缩观点。我们得出结论,当考虑到实在论与反实在论之争中所涉及的语义、认知和形而上学方面时,科学实在论与虚构主义之间所谓的兼容性开始产生一些紧张关系。