Direct download 4 more. How can we know what really happened in the distant past in places like ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Palestine, Greece, and Rome, especially since the evidence is fragmentary and ancient cultures are so different from our own frame of reference? Scholars may examine historical documents and archaeological artifacts, and then make reasonable inferences. But in the final analysis there can be no absolute certainty about events far removed from present reality, and the past must be reconstructed by means of hypotheses that Knowledge claims about the past, and about many areas of science as well, rest on a network of interdependence between theory and evidence, and between interpretation and data.
Works by P. Kosso - PhilPapers
In this fascinating study of epistemology, philosopher Peter Kosso argues for a coherence model of epistemic justification. In the first part, the conceptual argument, he proposes a model of knowledge of the past. In the second part he presents three detailed case studies drawn from the work of historians and archaeologists.
These studies are used to support and fine-tune the model outlined in the first part. Kosso presents many insights into the limits of knowledge and our ability to know the mental as well as the physical past. Historians, archaeologists, philosophers, and students interested in epistemology will find this accessible work to be of great value.
Philosophy of Archaeology in Philosophy of Social Science. Philosophy of History in Philosophy of Social Science. Symmetries in physics are most commonly recognized and discussed in terms of their function in the mathematical formalism of the theories. Discussion of the observation of symmetries in nature is less common.
This paper analyses the observation of particular symmetries such as Lorentz and gauge symmetries, distinguishing between direct observation of the symmetry itself and indirect evidence, the latter being the observation of some consequence of the symmetry are, in an important sense, directly observed, while local symmetries such as gauge Science, Logic, and Mathematics.
Symmetry in Physics in Philosophy of Physical Science. Direct download 6 more. This is an introductory survey to the philosophy of science suitable for beginners and nonspecialists. Its point of departure is the question: why should we believe what science tells us about the world? In this attempt to justify the claims of science the book treats such topics as observation data, confirmation of theories, and the explanation of phenomena. What emerges is a view of science in which observation relies on theory to give it meaning and credibility, while theory relies on observation for its motivation and validation.
Science has more to offer than just knowledge of nature; it can give us understanding of nature as well.
Epistemology of science is usually focused on knowledge and the criteria of justification, while paying little attention to understanding. In a reversal of this emphasis, this article is more about scientific understanding. I argue that the hallmarks of understanding are similar to an aesthetic feature associated with literature, music, and the visual arts. It is the feature described as coherence, harmony, and Aesthetics thus plays an epistemic role in science as an indication of understanding. Aesthetic Understanding in Aesthetics. General Philosophy of Science. Direct download 3 more.
Appearance and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Physics addresses quantum mechanics and relativity and their philosophical implications, focusing on whether these theories of modern physics can help us know nature as it really is, or only as it appears to us. The author clearly explains the foundational concepts and principles of both quantum mechanics and relativity and then uses them to argue that we can know more than mere appearances, and that we can know to some extent the He argues that modern physics gives us reason to believe that we can know some things about the objective, real world, but he also acknowledges that we cannot know everything, which results in a position he calls realistic realism.
Nature and scope of metaphysics
This book is not a survey of possible philosophical interpretations of modern physics, nor does it leap from a caricature of the physics to some wildly alarming metaphysics. Instead, it is careful with the physics and true to the evidence in arriving at its own realistic conclusions.
It presents the physics without mathematics, and makes extensive use of diagrams and analogies to explain important ideas. Engaging and accessible, Appearance and Reality serves as an ideal introduction for anyone interested in the intersection of philosophy and physics, including students in philosophy of physics and philosophy of science courses.
The concept of observability of entities in physical science is typically analysed in terms of the nature and significance of a dichotomy between observables and unobservables. In the present work, however, this categorization is resisted and observability is analysed in a descriptive way in terms of the information which one can receive through interaction with objects in the world.
The account of interaction and the transfer of information is done using applicable scientific theories. In this way, the question of observability The result is a demonstration that observability has many dimensions, some more epistemically significant than others. Constructive Empiricism in General Philosophy of Science.
Empiricism in Metaphilosophy. Direct download 9 more. More Details Original Title. Other Editions 1. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Appearance and Reality , please sign up. Be the first to ask a question about Appearance and Reality. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. Showing Rating details. Sort order. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers.
To view it, click here. If your answer is yes, then you are a metaphysical realist; however; if your answer is no, then you are a metaphysical anti-realist. Quantum mechanics has made many physicists metaphysical anti-realist, such as David Mermin. He says: "The moon is demonstrably not there when no one looks". There is also epistemological realism, both as an issue and philosophical position.
Th 1 The question of metaphysical realism is of existence is that if there is an external world reality independent from us. The issue is if we can know an independent reality, not just its appearance. If your answer is yes, then you are a epistemological realist; however; if your answer is no, then you are a epistemological anti-realist. The question of objectivity also has both a metaphysical and an epistemological issue.
Metaphysical issue is that if objects have objective properties and what are they if there is. For example, temperature of a bottle of water is an objective property, however being cold or hot is not an objective property of water. The epistemological issue is that how we can test or prove if something is an objective property of an object. Because we assume there are physical laws plausible for everyone. For example, appearance of an object in water depends on where the observer is.
If he outside of water, he sees the object shorter than the one inside of water. However, we do not interpret this as the length of the object depends on the observer. Note: Maybe this is not what the book says.
- Appearance and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Physics.
- SearchWorks Catalog;
- Get Skinny Stay Skinny;
- The Politics of National Security: Congress and U.S. Defense Policy (Twentieth Century Fund Book)!
However, I thought this. For example, the color of an apple may be different for a blind person. Yet, it does not indicate that the apple doesn't exist.
It's valid for QM as well. Even if we accept the view of Bohr Copenhagen Interpretation , which says the quantum objects doesn't have some independent properties such as position, momentum, etc. We can imagine and model mathematically how events occur in inertial reference frame, although it does not exist. There are also two possibilities for nature of time: 1 Time has an independent existence from physical objects and events.
Therefore, there is a difference between that physical objects don't change and that flow of time stops. Therefore, there is no difference between that physical objects don't change and that flow of time stops. There are two men, Bob and Marley, who are at the exactly same age. Suppose they are standing along a railway line, separated by a distance measured by them. Another person, Richard, moves along the line.source site
Appearance And Reality An Introduction To The Philosophy Of Physics
When Richard passes next to Bob, he calculates that Richard and Bob are at the same age. The question is that: Will Richard be at the same age with Marley, when he passes next to Marley? Determinateness has to do with the state of affairs at one instant, without regard as how it come to be or it will lead to be. If some properties at one instant are uncertain, then those properties are indeterminate. It's important to know that Bell's proof is not a proof of that all properties are indeterminate. We have no reason to think that some properties such as charge, magnitude not orientation of spin has no value before we make a measurement.