The new demarcation problem
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20416/LSRSPS.V10I1.1Keywords:
The demarcation problem, Scientific realism, metaphysics, metametaphysics, inference to the best explanationAbstract
How to conceive the relation between the concept of science and that of metaphysics ? — a very influential answer today advocates the "methodological naturalization of science". According to this thesis, even if science and metaphysics are epistemically independent undertakings, they are or should be methodologically analogous: metaphysical inquiry would or should be conducted by scientific means. The purpose of my paper is to show that such a way of conceiving metaphysics has an opposite effect to the one expected. Instead of raising metaphysical certainty to a scientific level, it lowers scientific certainty to a metaphysical level. I argue that, if one does not resolve to accept this consequence or to renounce a certain form of naturalization, a new problem of demarcation between science and metaphysics emerges
2.12.0.0References
ARMSTRONG, David Malet. 2010 [1989]. Les Universaux. Une introduction partisane. Paris: Ithaque.
BOUDRY, Marteen. 2013. Loky’s wager and Laudan’s error. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 79-98.
CARNAP, Rudolf. 1966. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. New York: Dover.
CHAKRAVARTTY, Anjan. 2017. Scientific Ontology. Integrating Naturalized Metaphysics and Voluntarist Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DELEUZE, Gilles & GATTARI Felix. 1991. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie ?. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
DEVITT, Michael. 1984. Realism and Truth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
DORR, Cian. 2008. There are not abstract objects. In SIDER, Timothy, HOWTHORNE, John & ZIMMERMAN, Dean (eds). 2008. Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Oxford: Blackwell.
DUHEM, Pierre. 2007 [1906]. La théorie physique. Son objet, sa structure. Paris: Vrin.
DUHEM, Pierre. 1893. Physique et métaphysique. Revue des Questions Scientifiques, 17(34): 55-83.
ESFELD, Michael. 2004. Quantum Entanglement and a Metaphysics of Relations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35: 601-617.
ESLFELD, Michael. 2022. Super-humeanisme : le plan de Camberra pour la métaphysique de la physique. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann, 299-324.
FARR, Farr & IVANOVA, Milena. 2020. Methods in Science and Metaphysics. In MILLER, James & BLISS, Ricky (eds). The Routledge Handbook of Metametaphysics. New York: Routledge.
FRENCH, Steven & McKENZIE, Kerry. 2012. Thinking outside the toolbox: Towards a more productive engagement between metaphysics and philosophy of physics. The European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 8(1).
FRIGG, Roman & NGUYEN, James. 2020. Scientific Representation. In ZALTA, Edward (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/scientific-representation/>.
HANSSON, Sven Ove. 2014. Science and pseudo, science. In ZALTA, Edward (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/>.
HANSSON, Sven Ove. 2013. Defining pseudo-science and science. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 61-77.
JACKSON, Frank. 1994. Armchair metaphysics. In O’LEARY-HAWTHORNE, John & MICHAELIS, Michael (eds). Philosophy in Mind. Alphen an den Rihn: Kluwer, 23-42.
AUTEUR. 2021a. A metaphysical metametaphysical skepticism?. Lato Sensu 8(1), 12-20.
AUTEUR. 2021b. La piste des stances dans l’enquête sur la post-vérité. Cahiers Philosophiques 164, 67-83.
AUTEUR. 2021c. The antimetaphysical argument against scientific realism. A minimally metaphysical response. General Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52, 577-595.
AUTEUR. 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Introduction. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann.
AUTEUR. 2018. Abduction créative rationnelle et connaissance des inobservables. In CLOT-GOUDARD, Rémi, HUYS, Viviane & VERNANT, Denis. 2018. L’abduction. Paris: Vrin: 205-118.
LADYMAN John & ROSS, Don. 2007. Every Thing Must Go. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LAUDAN Larry & LEPLIN, Jarrett, Empirical Equivalence and Underdetermination, Journal of Philosophy 88 (9): 449-472.
LAUDAN, Larry. 1983. The demise of the demarcation problem. In COHEN, Richard & LAUDAN, Laudan (eds). 1983. Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, 111-127.
LEWIS, Lewis. 2007 [1986]. De la pluralité des mondes. Paris: Éditions de l’Éclat.
LIVET, Pierre. 2022. Métaphysique, physique quantique et sciences sociales. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann, 451-478.
LOWE, Jonathan. 2011. The Rationality of Metaphysics. Synthese 178(1), 99-109.
LIPTON, Peter. Inference to the Best explanation. New York: Routledge.
MORGANTI & TAHKO. 2017. Moderately Naturalized Metaphysics. Synthese 194(7), 2557-2580.
NICKLE, Thomas. 2013. The problem of demarcation. History and future. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 101-120.
PAUL, Laurie. 2012. Metaphysics as Modeling: The Handmaiden’s Tale. Philosophical Studies 160: 1-29.
PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
PIGLIUCCI, Massimo. 2013. The demarcation problem. A (belated) response to Laudan. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 9-28.
POPPER, Karl. 1985 [1963]. Conjectures et réfutations. La croissance du savoir scientifique. Paris: Payot.
POUIVET, Roger. 2020. L’éthique intellectuelle. Paris : Vrin.
PSILLOS, Stathis. 1999. Scientific Realism. How science tracks truth. New York: Routledge.
RASPLUS, Valéry. 2014. Sciences et Pseudo-sciences. Regards des sciences humaines. Paris: Éditions Matériologiques.
ROCA-ROYCE. Sonia. 2020. A priori knowledge and persistent (dis)agreement. In DODD, Dylan. & ZARDINI, Elia. 2020. Beyond sense: New essays on the significance, grounds, and extent of the a priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SAATSI, Juha. 2017. Explanation and explanationism in science and metaphysics. In SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 163-192.
SCHLINDLER, Samuel. Theoretical Virtues. Uncovering Reality through theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017
SIDER, Timothy, HOWTHORNE, John & ZIMMERMAN, Dean (eds). 2008. Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Oxford: Blackwell.
SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
TIERCELIN, Claudine. 2011. Le ciment des choses. Paris: Éditions Ithaque.
VAN FRAASSEN, bas. 2002. The Empirical Stance. Yale: Yale University Press.
VAN INVAGEN, Peter. 2009. The New Antimetaphysicians. Proceeding and Adresses of the American Philosophical Association 83(2): 45-61.
YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Introduction. In SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-12.
BOUDRY, Marteen. 2013. Loky’s wager and Laudan’s error. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 79-98.
CARNAP, Rudolf. 1966. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. New York: Dover.
CHAKRAVARTTY, Anjan. 2017. Scientific Ontology. Integrating Naturalized Metaphysics and Voluntarist Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DELEUZE, Gilles & GATTARI Felix. 1991. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie ?. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
DEVITT, Michael. 1984. Realism and Truth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
DORR, Cian. 2008. There are not abstract objects. In SIDER, Timothy, HOWTHORNE, John & ZIMMERMAN, Dean (eds). 2008. Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Oxford: Blackwell.
DUHEM, Pierre. 2007 [1906]. La théorie physique. Son objet, sa structure. Paris: Vrin.
DUHEM, Pierre. 1893. Physique et métaphysique. Revue des Questions Scientifiques, 17(34): 55-83.
ESFELD, Michael. 2004. Quantum Entanglement and a Metaphysics of Relations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35: 601-617.
ESLFELD, Michael. 2022. Super-humeanisme : le plan de Camberra pour la métaphysique de la physique. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann, 299-324.
FARR, Farr & IVANOVA, Milena. 2020. Methods in Science and Metaphysics. In MILLER, James & BLISS, Ricky (eds). The Routledge Handbook of Metametaphysics. New York: Routledge.
FRENCH, Steven & McKENZIE, Kerry. 2012. Thinking outside the toolbox: Towards a more productive engagement between metaphysics and philosophy of physics. The European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 8(1).
FRIGG, Roman & NGUYEN, James. 2020. Scientific Representation. In ZALTA, Edward (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/scientific-representation/>.
HANSSON, Sven Ove. 2014. Science and pseudo, science. In ZALTA, Edward (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/>.
HANSSON, Sven Ove. 2013. Defining pseudo-science and science. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 61-77.
JACKSON, Frank. 1994. Armchair metaphysics. In O’LEARY-HAWTHORNE, John & MICHAELIS, Michael (eds). Philosophy in Mind. Alphen an den Rihn: Kluwer, 23-42.
AUTEUR. 2021a. A metaphysical metametaphysical skepticism?. Lato Sensu 8(1), 12-20.
AUTEUR. 2021b. La piste des stances dans l’enquête sur la post-vérité. Cahiers Philosophiques 164, 67-83.
AUTEUR. 2021c. The antimetaphysical argument against scientific realism. A minimally metaphysical response. General Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52, 577-595.
AUTEUR. 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Introduction. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann.
AUTEUR. 2018. Abduction créative rationnelle et connaissance des inobservables. In CLOT-GOUDARD, Rémi, HUYS, Viviane & VERNANT, Denis. 2018. L’abduction. Paris: Vrin: 205-118.
LADYMAN John & ROSS, Don. 2007. Every Thing Must Go. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LAUDAN Larry & LEPLIN, Jarrett, Empirical Equivalence and Underdetermination, Journal of Philosophy 88 (9): 449-472.
LAUDAN, Larry. 1983. The demise of the demarcation problem. In COHEN, Richard & LAUDAN, Laudan (eds). 1983. Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, 111-127.
LEWIS, Lewis. 2007 [1986]. De la pluralité des mondes. Paris: Éditions de l’Éclat.
LIVET, Pierre. 2022. Métaphysique, physique quantique et sciences sociales. In Auteur (ed). 2022. Métaphysique et Sciences. Paris: Hermann, 451-478.
LOWE, Jonathan. 2011. The Rationality of Metaphysics. Synthese 178(1), 99-109.
LIPTON, Peter. Inference to the Best explanation. New York: Routledge.
MORGANTI & TAHKO. 2017. Moderately Naturalized Metaphysics. Synthese 194(7), 2557-2580.
NICKLE, Thomas. 2013. The problem of demarcation. History and future. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 101-120.
PAUL, Laurie. 2012. Metaphysics as Modeling: The Handmaiden’s Tale. Philosophical Studies 160: 1-29.
PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
PIGLIUCCI, Massimo. 2013. The demarcation problem. A (belated) response to Laudan. In PIGLIUCCI, Massimo & BOUDRY, Marteen (eds). 2013. Philosophy of pseudo-science. Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 9-28.
POPPER, Karl. 1985 [1963]. Conjectures et réfutations. La croissance du savoir scientifique. Paris: Payot.
POUIVET, Roger. 2020. L’éthique intellectuelle. Paris : Vrin.
PSILLOS, Stathis. 1999. Scientific Realism. How science tracks truth. New York: Routledge.
RASPLUS, Valéry. 2014. Sciences et Pseudo-sciences. Regards des sciences humaines. Paris: Éditions Matériologiques.
ROCA-ROYCE. Sonia. 2020. A priori knowledge and persistent (dis)agreement. In DODD, Dylan. & ZARDINI, Elia. 2020. Beyond sense: New essays on the significance, grounds, and extent of the a priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SAATSI, Juha. 2017. Explanation and explanationism in science and metaphysics. In SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 163-192.
SCHLINDLER, Samuel. Theoretical Virtues. Uncovering Reality through theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017
SIDER, Timothy, HOWTHORNE, John & ZIMMERMAN, Dean (eds). 2008. Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Oxford: Blackwell.
SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
TIERCELIN, Claudine. 2011. Le ciment des choses. Paris: Éditions Ithaque.
VAN FRAASSEN, bas. 2002. The Empirical Stance. Yale: Yale University Press.
VAN INVAGEN, Peter. 2009. The New Antimetaphysicians. Proceeding and Adresses of the American Philosophical Association 83(2): 45-61.
YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Introduction. In SLATER, Matthew, & YUDELL, Zanja. 2017. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-12.
Downloads
Published
2023-12-15
How to Cite
Kunstler, Raphaël. 2023. “The New Demarcation Problem”. Lato Sensu: Revue De La Société De Philosophie Des Sciences 10 (1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.20416/LSRSPS.V10I1.1.
Issue
Section
Research Paper
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Raphael Kunstler
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
