Scientific realists claim we can justifiably believe that science is getting at the truth. However, they have faced historical challenges: various episodes across history appear to demonstrate that even strongly supported scientific theories can be overturned and left behind. In response, realists have developed new positions and arguments. As a result of specific challenges from the history of science, and realist responses, we find ourselves with an ever-increasing dataset bearing on the (possible) relationship between science and truth. The present volume introduces new historical cases impacting the debate and advances the discussion of cases that have only very recently been introduced. At the same time, shifts in philosophical positions affect the very kind of case study that is relevant. Thus, the historical work must proceed hand in hand with philosophical analysis of the different positions and arguments in play. It is with this in mind that the volume is divided into two sections, entitled "Historical Cases for the Debate" and "Contemporary Scientific Realism." All sides agree that historical cases are informative with regard to how, or whether, science connects with truth. Defying proclamations as early as the 1980s announcing the death knell of the scientific realism debate, here is that rare thing: a philosophical debate making steady and definite progress. Moreover, the progress it is making concerns one of humanity's most profound and important questions: the relationship between science and truth, or, put more boldly, the epistemic relation between humankind and the reality in which we find ourselves.

About the Author
Timothy D. Lyons is Chair of Philosophy and Professor of Philosophy of Science at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. He has numerous publications on the scientific realism debate in, for instance, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Science, Synthese, and The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Science. He is the author of Scientific Realism: Elements in the Philosophy of Science (Cambridge University Press, 2021). Peter Vickers is Associate Professor and Reader in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Durham in the United Kingdom. He is the author of Understanding Inconsistent Science (Oxford University Press, 2013) and the Associate Editor of the journal Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. He has several publications on the scientific realism debate in, for instance, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Science, Synthese, and The European Journal for Philosophy of Science.

Reviews
The book, which is a highly valuable resource for researchers, begins with an introductory chapter and editorial summary of the papers in the collection, which are then divided into two parts, one dealing mainly with historical case studies and the other with contemporary issues. * Elay Shech, Metascience *
Debates over scientific realism will certainly continue, but this volume provides a basis for substantive, informed, and further careful work. Recommended. Graduate students and faculty. * D. Bantz, University of Alaska, CHOICE *
a highly valuable resource for researchers * Elay Shech, Metascience *



Book Information
ISBN 9780190946814
Author Timothy D. Lyons
Format Hardback
Page Count 394
Imprint Oxford University Press Inc
Publisher Oxford University Press Inc
Weight(grams) 726g
Dimensions(mm) 244mm * 163mm * 25mm