Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Theoretical entities in modern science can be hard to rep... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Theoretical entities in modern science can be hard to represent to ourselves.

    PerceptionSkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Our conceptions are limited to perceptible forms and properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical structures like Hilbert spaces provide precise, non-perceptual representations of quantum entities such as electrons and wavefunctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a theoretical entity can be fully characterized by a formal mathematical structure, representational difficulty does not entail cognitive inaccessibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Structural realists like Ladyman and French argue that what science represents is relational structure, not intrinsic perceptible properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If theoretical entities just are the structural relations captured in equations, our grasp of those equations constitutes genuine representation of the entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismPerception

    Related

    If a theoretical entity can be fully characterized by a formal mathematical stru...If theoretical entities just are the structural relations captured in equations,...Mathematical structures like Hilbert spaces provide precise, non-perceptual repr...Our conceptions are limited to perceptible forms and properties.
    +1 moreShow less
    Structural realists like Ladyman and French argue that what science represents i...

    Similar

    Theoretical entities in modern science can be hard to represent to our...94%Abstract entities face serious epistemological and identification prob...74%The natural sciences are inadequate for understanding human reality74%Phenomenology as a rigorous science must limit its study to objects of...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: wright
    View source passageHide passage
    Even at this, unobservables should not be specialized natures or forces taken to account just for certain phenomena. This was, according to Wright, the problem with scholastic substantial forms (PD 166–67). His criticism of metaphysical concepts was that they are empirically poor; they do not link different phenomena and do not generate predictions that can be verified at the level of the tangible and visible. Unlike early modern critics of scholastic metaphysical concepts, Wright did not claim
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit