Boscovich's force-centered solution lacks explanatory closure: appealing to primitive forces between non-entities seems less parsimonious than extended atoms with intrinsic properties.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Boscovich(as a historical figure in physics and philosophy): An 18th-century scientist and philosopher (Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich) who proposed that all matter is made of point-like particles with no size, held together only by forces between them—basically the opposite of atoms with physical volume.
Explanatory closure(philosophy of science/epistemology): The idea that a theory fully explains what it claims to explain without leaving unsolved problems or contradictions.
Extended atoms(as a contrasting view to Boscovich's theory about what atoms are like): Atoms that have actual size and take up space (as opposed to Boscovich's point-particles, which are infinitely small).
Force-centered solution(as a theoretical approach to understanding matter): An explanation of how matter works that puts all the emphasis on invisible forces pushing and pulling between particles, rather than on the solid stuff of the particles themselves.

Based on where you are in your exploration