J. Ladyman, D. Dennett and E. J. Lowe: Scientific Realism and Metaphysics of Possibilities
https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-4-5-33
Abstract
The paper aims to show that combining D. Dennett’s conception of real patterns as the “object” ontology, understood as the fundamental concept of existence (D. Ross, J. Ladyman), and E. J. Lowe’s four-category ontology as the “base”, we can get an original conception of scientific realism, which will compete successfully with others in terms of traditional arguments for and against scientific realism, or in terms of interpreting the requirements posed by modern science, and will also be successful as an independent conception of metaphysics, setting original ideas about substantiality, identity, modality and causality. The adoption of E.J. Low’s “serious essentialism” helps to solve the problem of J. Ladyman’s ontic structural realism about the matching of nomological (natural) and metaphysical modalities. E. J. Lowe’s statement that “the subject of metaphysics is the possible, but only science can say which of the alternative metaphysical possibilities is actual” reinforces the required relationship between science and metaphysics. The fact that we choose the neo-Aristotelian rather than the Quinean type of metaphysics helps to formulate sufficient conditions for the pattern existence, as well as to adopt an understanding of causality in terms of “forces”, “predispositions” and “manifestations”, connected by a formal (not real!) ontological relation of metaphysical dependence. In this sense, dealing with H. Putnam’s question “what realism is”, we can answer that scientific realism is an exercise in the epistemology of modality, associated with clarifying the essence of the objects of scientific theory in terms of “basic” philosophical ontology.
Keywords
ontic structural realism,
verificationism,
disposition,
modality,
metaphysical necessity,
essence,
metaphysical dependence,
causality,
persistence,
pattern ontology
Supporting agencies: The reported study was funded by RFBR according to research project no. 19-011-00120 “Metaphysical Foundations for Natural Science Ontology: Real Patterns and Metametaphysics Project”
About the Authors
N. V. Golovko
Novosibirsk State University; Institute of Philosophy and Law of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikita Golovko, Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Head of the Chair of Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology of Science, Novosibirsk State University; Leading Researcher, Institute of Philosophy and Law SB RAS
Novosibirsk
I. I. Ertel
Institute of Philosophy and Law of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ilya Ertel, PhD-student
Novosibirsk
References
1. Berenstain N., Ladyman J. On Structural Realism and Modality // E. Landry, D. Rickles (eds.) Structural Realism: Structure, Object and Causality. New York: Springer, 2012. P. 149–168.
2. Bub J. Why the Quantum? Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 2004, vol. 35, p. 241–266.
3. Chakravartty A. The Structuralist Conception of Objects. Philosophy of Science, 2003, vol. 70, p. 867–878.
4. Devitt M. Coming to Our Senses: A Naturalistic Program for Semantic Localism. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
5. Devitt M. Realism and Truth. Princeton University Press, 1997.
6. Duwell A. Quantum Information Does Not Exist. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 2003, vol. 34, p. 479–499.
7. Feigl H. Existential Hypotheses. Realistic versus Phenomenalistic Interpretations. Philosophy of Science, 1950, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 35–62.
8. Fuchs C., Peres, A. Quantum Theory Needs No “Interpretation”. Physics Today, 2000, vol. 3, p. 70–71.
9. Golovko N. J. Ladyman and E. J. Lowe: Patterns, Essence, and Truthmaking. Siberian Journal of Philosophy, 2019, vol. 17, no. 4, p. 63–77. (in Russ.)
10. Golovko N. On D. Dennett and His Patterns Again: H. Reichenbach, J. Haugeland, and a New Empiricism [Eschsho raz o D. Dennete i patternah: G. Reihenbah, Dzh. Hogeland i novyi empirism]. Siberian Journal of Philosophy, 2017, vol. 15, no. 2, p. 53–67. (in Russ.)
11. Golovko N. V. Naturalization of metaphysics: scientific realism and dialectical materialism [Naturalizatsiya metafiziki: nauchnyi realism i dialekticheskii materialism]. Voprosy filosofii, 2013, no. 8, p. 24–33 (in Russ.)
12. Golovko N. V. Naturalizatsiya epistemologii i osnovnye argumenty v polzu nauchno go realisma [Naturalization of Epistemology and the Basic Arguments For Scientific Realism]. Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Series: Philosophy, 2006, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 51–57. (in Russ.)
13. Golovko N. V. Scientific Realism and Naturalization of Semantics [Nauchnyi realism i naturalizatsiya semantiki]. Tsennosti i Smysly, 2013а, vol. 3, p. 75–87.
14. Golovko N. V. Theoretical and operational constraints in epistemology of science: overcoming of logicism [Teoreticheskie i operatsionalnye ogranicheniya v epistemologii nauki: preodolenie logitsizma]. Philosophy of Science, 2007v, no. 1, p. 33–69. (in Russ.)
15. Golovko N. General relativity and causality, reasoning from metaphysics, and E. J. Lowe’s ontology. Siberian Journal of Philosophy, 2021, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 63–77. (in Russ.)
16. Golovko N. V. Naturalistic Turn: Putting Metaphysics First [Naturalisticheskii po vorot: pervichnoct metafiziki]. Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Series: Philosophy, 2010, vol. 8, no. 4, p. 33–38. (in Russ.)
17. Golovko N. V. Semantic Realism by H. Feigl and Independence of Truth [Seman ticheskii realism G. Feiglya i nezavisimost’ istiny]. Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Series: Philosophy, 2008, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 22–27. (in Russ.)
18. Hirvonen I., Pattiniemi I. Scientific Structuralism Does Not Necessitate Modal Realism // Book of Abstracts. 15th Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (University of Helsinki, 3–8 August 2015). University of Helsinki, 2015, p. 361.
19. Kitcher P. The Naturalists Return. Philosophical Review, 1992, vol. 101, no. 1, p. 53–114.
20. Konstantinov F. V., Marakhov V. G. (ed.). Objective dialectics [Ob’ektivnaya dialektika] / Materialistic dialectics [Materialisticheskaya dialektika] [in 5 vols.]: Vol. 1. Moscow: Mysl’, 1981.
21. Ladyman J., Ross D., Spurrett D., Collier J. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford University Press, 2007.
22. Laudan L. Normative Naturalism. Philosophy of Science, 1990, vol. 57, no. 1, p. 44–59.
23. Lowe E. J. A Survey of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press, 2002.
24. Lowe E. J. The Four-Category Ontology: A Metaphysical Foundation for Natural
25. Science. Clarendon Press, 2006.
26. Lowe E. J. The Possibility of Metaphysics. Clarendon Press, 1998.
27. Lowe E. J. Two Notions of Being: Entity and Essence. Royal Institute of Philosophy
28. Supplement, 2008, vol. 62, p. 23–48
29. Lowe E. J. What is the Source of Our Knowledge of Modal Truths? Mind, 2012, vol.
30. , p. 919–950.
31. Psillos S. The Structure, The Whole Structure And Nothing But The Structure. Philosophy of Science, 2006, vol. 73, p. 560-570.
32. Putnam H. Meaning and the Moral Sciences. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978.
33. Ross D. Rainforest Realism: A Dennettian Theory of Existence. In: Brook A., Ross D., Thompson D. (eds.). Dennett’s Philosophy: A Comprehensive Assessment. MIT Press, 2000, p. 147–168.
34. Schaffer J. On What Grounds What. In: D. Chalmers, D. Manley, R. Wasserman (eds.). Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 347–383
35. Tahko T. The Epistemology of Essence. In: A. Carruth, S. Gibb, J. Heil (eds.). Ontology, Modality and Mind. Themes from the Metaphysics of E.J. Lowe. Oxford University Press, 2018, p. 93-110.
36. van Fraassen B. The Scientific Image. Oxford University Press, 1980.
Review
For citations:
Golovko N.V., Ertel I.I. J. Ladyman, D. Dennett and E. J. Lowe: Scientific Realism and Metaphysics of Possibilities. Siberian Journal of Philosophy. 2021;19(4):5-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-4-5-33
Views:
336
Email this article 