Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
3.7 Conclusions
During the twentieth century, the development of the philosophy of science mostly
proceeded by ignoring and even denying ontological matters. The problem of
intertheoretic relationships did not escape the influence of this trend: it remained
confined to semantic discussions about the way of obtaining terms and propositions
of one theory from the terms and propositions of another theory considered more
fundamental. It was only in the last decades that the interest in the ontological
dimension of knowledge came back to the philosophy of science community.
The Kantian-rooted ontological pluralism, with its attempt to rethink the links
between scientific theories in the light of the problem of realism, intends to be a
manifestation of this trend. From the pluralist perspective it is possible to face the
question about the relations between incompatible ontologies, corresponding to
theories simultaneously accepted by the scientific community, without confining
some of them to an apparent or secondary position with respect to the supposedly
“fundamental” realm. This approach offers us a diversified scientific reality, which
unfolds in multiple ontologies, all of them equally objective and related with each
other by non-hierarchical links.
Our ontological pluralism has been successfully applied in the resolution of some
long-standing problems in the philosophy of physics (see discussion in Lombardi and
P´rez Ransanz
2012
, Second Part), such as the problem of determinism (Lombardi
2002
) and the problem of irreversibility in classical statistical mechanics (Labarca
and Lombardi
2007
); it has also been suggested as an element for the solution of the
problem of the classical limit of quantum mechanics (Castagnino and Lombardi
2004
) and of the problem of irreversibility in quantum mechanics (Castagnino
et al.
2005
;LombardiandP´rez Ransanz
2012
, Chapter X). Of course, no argument
or application can claim to serve as a definitive “proof” of a philosophical thesis.
Therefore, even if we cannot persuade the critics of ontological pluralism, at least we
have contributed to reinstalling the ontological discussion in the context of the
philosophy of chemistry.
References
Amann A (1992) Must a molecule have a shape? S Afr J Chem 45:29-38
Belot G, Earman J (1997) Chaos out of order: quantum mechanics, the correspondence principle
and chaos. Stud Hist Philos Mod Phys 28:147-182
Castagnino M, Lombardi O (2004) Self-induced decoherence: a new approach. Stud Hist Philos
Mod Phys 35:73-107
Castagnino M, Gadella M, Lombardi O (2005) Time
s arrow and irreversibility in time-
asymmetric quantum mechanics. Int Stud Philos Sci 19:223-243
Dirac PAM (1929) Quantum mechanics of many-electron systems. Proc R Soc A123:714-733
'
