Keywords
worldmaking
methodology of science
constructivism
Nelson Goodman
How to Cite
Abstract
This study discusses the extent to which Goodman’s constructivist conception of worldmaking may serve the needs of scientific practice. I argue that worldmaking should help us retain a common methodological order and a basic framework for scientific pluralism. In this way it should provide us not only with better scientific knowledge but also with a greater understanding of the world in general that would be inclusive of both scientific and nonscientific disciplines. The main purpose of this paper is to show that, if revisited, Goodman’s idea of versions, including even mutually exclusive scientific theories, can aid the gradual progress of pluralistic science. Taking the prevailing criticism of Goodman’s conception into account, I argue that worldmaking can serve as a methodological apparatus for scientific disciplines because it presents a position of moderated constructivism which, thanks to the variable criterion of rightness, offers a way to maintain both relativism and skepticism.
References
Ackerman, James S. “Worldmaking and Practical Criticism.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 39, no. 2 (1981): 249–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/430154.
Ayer, Alfred J. Logical Positivism. New York: The Free Press, 1959.
Boghossian, Paul A. Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199287185.001.0001.
Chang, Hasok. Is Water H2O? Evidence, Realism and Pluralism. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007087414000995.
Declos, Alexandre. “Goodman’s Many Worlds.” Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 7, no. 6 (2019): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.15173/jhap.v7i6.3827.
Elgin, Catherine Z. “The Legacy of Nelson Goodman.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62, no. 3 (2001): 679–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00085.x.
Feyerabend, Paul K. Against Method. New York: Verso, 1993.
Feyerabend, Paul K. Realism, Rationalism and Scientific Method: Philosophical Papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171526.
Goodman, Nelson. “Notes on the Well-Made World.” Erkenntnis 19, no. 1–3 (1983): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00174777.
Goodman, Nelson. Of Mind and Other Matters. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.
Goodman, Nelson. “On Starmaking.” Synthese 45, no. 2 (1980): 211–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413560.
Goodman, Nelson. “Relativism Awry: Response to Feyerabend.” New Ideas in Psychologyy 2, no. 2 (1984): 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(84)90016-3.
Goodman, Nelson. “Replies.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 39, no. 3 (1981): 273–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/430161.
Goodman, Nelson. “The Test of Simplicity.” Science 128, no. 3331 (1958): 1064–69. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.128.3331.1064.
Goodman, Nelson. Ways of Worldmakinggg. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co., 1978.
Goodman, Nelson. “Words, Works, Worlds.” Erkenntnis 9, no. 1 (1975): 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00223133.
Goodman, Nelson, and Catherine Z. Elgin. Reconceptions in Philosophy & Other Arts & Sciences. London: Routledge, Chapman & Hall, 1988.
Hellman, Geoffrey, and John L. Bell. “Pluralism and The Foundations of Mathematics.” In Scientific Pluralism, edited by Stephen H. Kellert, Helen E. Longino, and C. Kenneth Waters, 64–79. Mineapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006.
Hempel, Carl G. “Comments on Goodman’s ‘Ways of Worldmaking.’” Synthese 45, no. 2 (1980): 193–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413558.
Hernandi, Paul. “More Questions Concerning Quotation.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 38, no. 3 (1981): 271–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/430160.
Kuhn, Thomas S. “Objectivity, Value Judgement, and Theory Choice.” In Thomas S. Kuhn: The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, 356–67. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012.
Martin, Richard. “On Some Aesthetic Relations.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 38, no. 3 (1981): 258–64. https://doi.org/10.2307/430156.
McCormick, Peter. Starmaking: Realism, Anti-realism, and Irrealism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6438.001.0001.
Mitchell, J. W. T. “Realism, Irrealism, and Ideology: A Critique of Nelson Goodman.” Journal of Aesthetic Education 25, no. 1 (1991): 23–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/3333088.
Neurath, Otto. “Sociology and Physicalism.” In Logical Positivism, edited by Alfred J. Ayer, 282–317. New York: The Free Press, 1959.
Norris, Christopher. Hilary Putnam: Realism, Reason and the Uses of Uncertainty. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002.
Norris, Christopher. Philosophy of Language and the Challenge to Scientific Realism. London: Routledge, 2003. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203390726.
Peirce, Charles S. “The Fixation of Belief.” Popular Science Monthlyy 12, no. 1 (1877): 1–15.
Polanyi, Michael. Science, Faith and Society. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1946.
Putnam, Hilary. Mind, Language and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Putnam, Hilary. “Reflections on Goodman’s Ways of Worldmaking.” The Journal of Philosophyy 76, no. 11 (1979): 603–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025692.
Quine, Willard V. “Otherworldly.” Review of Ways of Worldmaking, by Nelson Goodman, The New York Review of Books (November 23, 1978): 25.
Rodríguez, Xavier de Donato. “Construction and Worldmaking: The Significance of Nelson Goodman’s Pluralism.” Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 24, no. 2 (2009): 213–25.
Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979.
Scheffler, Israel. “A Plea for Plurealism.” Erkenntnis 52, no. 2 (2000): 161–73. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005513808997.
Scheffler, Israel. Inquiries: Philosophical Studies of Language, Science, and Learninggg. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2013.
Scheffler, Israel. “My Quarrels with Nelson Goodman.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62, no. 3 (2001): 665–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00084.x.
Scheffler, Israel. “Reply to Goodman.” In Starmaking: Realism, Anti-Realism, and Irrealism, edited by Peter J. McCormick, 161–64. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
Scheffler, Israel. Science and Subjectivity. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing Co., 1982.
Scheffler, Israel. Symbolic Worlds: Art, Science, Language, Ritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511663864.
Scheffler, Israel. “The Wonderful Worlds of Goodman.” Synthese 45, no. 2 (1980): 201–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413559.
Scheffler, Israel. Worlds of Truth – A Philosophy of Knowledge. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444310948.
Shottenkirk, Dena. Nominalism and its Aftermath: The Philosophy of Nelson Goodman. New York: Springer, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9931-1.
Siegel, Harwey. “Googmanian Relativism.” The Monistt 67, no. 3 (1984): 359–75. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist198467323.
Schwartz, Robert. “Starting from Scratch: Making Worlds.” Erkenntnis 52, no. 2 (2000): 151–59. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005590919841.
Westerhoff, Jan. The Non-Existence of the Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198847915.001.0001.
Westerhoff, Jan. “What It Means to Live in a Virtual World Generated by Our Brain.” Erkenntnis 81, no. 3 (2016): 507–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-015-9752-z.
Since 2019, TEORIE VĚDY / THEORY OF SCIENCE journal provides open access to its content under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Authors who publish in this journal agree that:
- Authors retain copyright and publication rights without restrictions and guarantee the journal the right of first publishing. All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license, which allows others to share this work under condition that its author and first publishing in this journal was acknowledged.
- Authors may enter into other agreements for non-exclusive dissemination of work in the version in which it was published in the journal (for example, publishing it in a book), but they have to acknowledge its first publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to make their work available online (for example, on their personal websites, social media accounts, and institutional repositories) as such a practice may lead to productive exchanges of views as well as earlier and higher citations of published work.
There are no author fees, no article processing charges, or submission charges.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allows readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
A summary of the open access policy is also available in the Sherpa Romeo database.