Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Still resisting: replies to my critics

K. Brad Wray: Resisting scientific realism, Cambridge University Press, 2018, 224 pp., $105 HB

  • 77 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Irving, J.C.E. 2018. Earth’s Soft Heart: A Modern Seismological Method Raises Questions About the Properties of Earth’s Inner Core. Science 362(6412): 294.

  2. Laudan, L. 1981. A Confutation of Convergent Realism. Philosophy of Science 48(1): 19–49.

  3. Psillos, S. 2016. Broken Structuralism. Metascience 25(2): 163–171.

  4. Psillos, S. 1999. Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth. London: Routledge.

  5. Science. 2019. A Cooler Core for Earth. Science 364(6439): 448–449.

  6. Stanford, P. K. 2001. Refusing the Devil’s Bargain: What Kind of Underdetermination Should We take Seriously? Philosophy of Science, 68: S3 (Proceedings of the PSA) S1–S12.

  7. Van Fraassen, B.C. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  8. Vickers, P. 2013. Understanding Inconsistent Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  9. Worrall, J. 1989. Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds? Dialectica 43(1–2): 99–124.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Line Edslev Andersen and Lori Nash for feedback on an earlier draft.

Author information

Correspondence to K. Brad Wray.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wray, K.B. Still resisting: replies to my critics. Metascience (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11016-020-00490-7

Download citation