The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Idealization and the Aims of Science
Abstract
Idealizations are rampant and unchecked in science. That is, they exist throughout our best representations, and there is little focus on eliminating them or controlling their influence. This is because idealizations, despite their falsity, play a positive representational role. This account of idealization motivates a reconstrual of the aims of science. Science has a variety of epistemic and non-epistemic aims, and the ultimate epistemic aim is understanding, which can be furthered by sacrificing truth. The deemphasis of scientific truth drives a wedge between scientific results and any metaphysical implications regarding ontology, causation, or levels of organization.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“All scientific models contain idealisations: the intentional misrepresentation of a target system.”
From Explaining known past routes, underdetermination, and the use of multiple cost functions (2024) · cites this paper as Potochnik, 2017
Citations
Cites
The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme
Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1979.0086 · Cited by 7,770
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
That’s a Lot to Process! Pitfalls of Popular Path Models
Rohrer, J. M., Hünermund, P., Arslan, R. C., & Elson, M. (2022) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/25152459221095827 · Cited by 267
First principles in the life sciences: the free-energy principle, organicism, and mechanism
Colombo, M., & Wright, C. (2021) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-018-01932-w · Cited by 101
Explaining known past routes, underdetermination, and the use of multiple cost functions
Lewis, J. (2024) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-023-09621-w · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Potochnik, A.
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2017
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
