Studies in scientific realism /

Kukla offers a detailed analysis of the 30-year debate over realism versus antirealism. Both sides accept the existence of the commonsense objects of perception, while the realist accepts, and the antirealist denies, that the unobservable entities (e.g., electrons) postulated by scientific theories exist. The debates focus on minimal epistemic realism (we can come to know that theoretical entities actually exist) and its negation, called epistemic antirealism or constructive empiricism (such entities cannot be known). Kukla's position is that realism and antirealism are currently irreconcilable and unproven. He begins by showing that neither the success of science nor the facts of scientific practice support realism. He accepts that all theories may indefinitely have many empirical equivalents, but that this does not prove the case against realism. Three chapters that discuss the theory-observation distinction include Kukla's proposal for defining the form of atomic observation sentences so as to fit different models of perception. In a final chapter, Kukla outlines what he calls "Epistemology X" that will accommodate such irreconcilables as realism-antirealism. A balanced, detailed exposition of the ploys and counter-ploys in the debate over realism. Upper-division undergraduates through professionals. A. B. Stewart; emeritus, Antioch College