Constructive empiricism

The Constructive empiricism is a modern brand of empiricism. Its founder is Bas van Fraassen, who founded the Constructive Empiricism in his monumental work, The Scientific Image (1980). The attribute " constructive" wants to express that science is no activity in the sense of discovering the truth, but rather a design to ensure empirical adequacy van Fraassen. This describes van Fraassen, with reference to Pierre Duhem as "to save the phenomena ".

Empirical adequacy, agnosticism and aim of science

Representatives of Constructive Empiricism are agnostic to the theoretical terms of a theory ( atom, gene, etc.). Everything what a Constructive empiricist believes are observations that can be personalized with the naked eye (sometimes with the aid of instruments ) accomplish.

Constructive Empiricism is the thesis that science merely entailed it to construct empirically adequate theories, corresponding to the empirical adequacy. The acceptance of a theory will not include the belief that the theory is true in every respect, but merely that it was empirically adequate.

Van Fraassen, according to the scientists do not accept a theory because it only because he believes in the truth, but to their empirical adequacy. The motives of the individuals are irrelevant. Just as, for example, the goal of a chess game can be determined by the Matt put the opponent. Individual motivations such as Etc. fame addiction, Sales of boredom then do not play a role.

Semantic interpretation of theories

In contrast to logical positivism and instrumentalism van Fraassen wants to be understood the statements of a theory literally. A theory that says the universe consists of atoms and a theory which holds that the universe is a continuum that can never be equivalent. Not even if they are to explain the same observations. However, precisely this deny the positivist and instrumentalist. In this respect, van Fraassen agrees with the Scientific Realism. The statements of a theory are semantically either true or false (either the universe is made of atoms, or a continuum ). However, van Fraassen denies that the answer to this question is the goal of science. Van Fraassen says he is against this question agnostic. It counted solely the empirical adequacy of the theory.

In contrast to the Scientific Realism van Fraassen deal with the just -mentioned strategy, the problem of Unterdeterminierung of theories by evidence. All empirically equivalent theories are equal for the constructive empiricist. The Scientific Realists, however, must like additional criteria such as simplicity, explanatory power endeavor to justify the decision for or against one or the other theory. Van Fraassen calls this criteria pejoratively as " metaphysical baggage ", which are dispensable for the philosophical understanding of science.

Pragmatics of explanation

Explanations, simplicity and other values ​​keeps van Fraassen as nothing more than pragmatic dimensions that can play a crucial role in the theory of choice, but compared to the empirical adequacy of the theory are only secondary. Van Fraassen believes that empirical adequacy is a precondition for explanation. Explanation is then something like an unnecessary but pleasant bonus. Here van Fraassen is, of course, decidedly on the realists.