Scientific Models and Metalinguistic Negotiation

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published 25-09-2019
Mirco Sambrotta

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explore the possibility that, at least, some metaphysical debates are 'metalinguistic negotiations' (to employ a recent term coined by David Plunkett and Timothy Sundell). I will take the dispute between the dominant approaches of realism and the anti-realism ones (especially Fictionalism) about the ontological status of scientific models as a case-study. I will argue that such a debate may be better understood as a disagreement, at bottom normatively, motivated, insofar as a normative and non-factual question may be involved in it: how the relevant piece of language ought to be used. Even though I will generally assess the prospects for a broadly deflationist approach, I shall outline a sense in which the dispute can be recast as 'minimally substantive'. 

How to Cite

Sambrotta, M. (2019). Scientific Models and Metalinguistic Negotiation. THEORIA, 34(2), 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.18298
Abstract 312 | PDF Downloads 218 XML Downloads 85

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

scientific models, metalinguistic negotiation, conceptual ethics, ontological debates

Section
ARTICLES