Attatched Below is the chapter
answer one of the following questions (indicate which questions you are responding to using the numbers below):
1. Explain why the significant focus on idealization and modeling in science motivates the anti-realist position. Massimi suggests that this emphasis on abstractions might lead some to argue that the aim of science isn’t truth but understanding. What is the difference between truth and understanding? Why might that aim better capture these sorts of scientific practices?
2. Explain what underdetermination is and why it poses a challenge for scientific realists. On pgs. 17-19 of the Module 4: Annotation Packet, Massimi defends a view called scientific perspectivism, a kind of scientific realism. Noting in particular what she says on page 18, is this view susceptible to the underdetermination argument?
3. Explain the scientific realist and anti-realist views. Then consider: Suppose the vast majority of the non-scientific community accepts one of these two views. What might the implications be? If the public had largely scientific realist leanings, do you think they’d be more receptive to what scientists say and the state of scientific practice? If the public had largely scientific anti-realist leanings, would this reception be any different? Would scientists still pursue the same research questions or do you think they’d be pursuing different ones? In other words, what do you think the real-world applications of this debate are?
