Abstract

Scientific realism is, roughly, the thesis according to which science is an epistemically progressive enterprise and current well-confirmed theories are at least approximately true. Putnam has argued that scientific realism is the only philosophy of science that does not make the success of science a miracle. This “explanationist” defense of scientific realism has come under attack by philosophers such as Arthur Fine, Chuang Liu, and Putnam himself. In this paper, I defend the explanationist defense against some of these objections