Nickles raises many original objections against scientific realism. One of them holds that scientific realism originates from the end of history illusion. I reply that this objection is self-defeating and commits the genetic fallacy. Another objection is that it is unknowable whether our descendants will regard our current mature theories as true or false. I reply that this objection entails skepticism about induction, leading to skepticism about the world, which is inconsistent with the appeal to the end of history illusion. Finally, I argue that we have an inductive rationale for thinking that will lead our descendants to regard our current mature theories as true.
The aim of the article is to bring a new angle to the debate about scientific realism in connection with the caloric theory of heat. Stathis Psillos examined the caloric theory in connection with scientific realism and the argument of pessimistic induction, and his approach was subsequently criticised by Hasok Chang. My aim is twofold. Firstly, to evaluate to what extent Chang’s critique is justified, and to highlight certain positive aspects of this critique. Secondly, I will attempt to show how on the basis of a study of the calorific theory of heat we might trace more general principles which, despite Chang’s critique of Psillos’ strategy, undermine the plausibility of the pessimistic induction.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.