Brad Wray publishes "A new twist to the No Miracles Argument for the success of science"
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 69 (2018): 86-89
- Critically examines Trout's recent defense of scientific realism, a new version of the No Miracles Argument.
- Argues that Trout fails to show that the exponential grow of science since the 17th C. was a result of scientists finally hitting upon an approximately true theory.
- Argues that Trout's analysis of the unreliability of our sense of understanding ultimately undermines his own argument.
J. D. Trout has recently developed a new defense of scientific realism, a new version of the No Miracles Argument. I critically evaluate Trout's novel defense of realism. I argue that Trout's argument for scientific realism and the related explanation for the success of science are self-defeating. In the process of arguing against the traditional realist strategies for explaining the success of science, he inadvertently undermines his own argument.