| |
| | [No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-07) |
 | | Even if there are ultimate fundamental laws out there, waiting for us to discover them, it hardly follows that the best way to spend the next $10 billion on science is to add an order of magnitude to the energy of some underground proton-proton collisions. |
 | | The primary argument for fundamentalism, not yet mentioned, is this: we all believe, with very good reason, that things in the physical world are all composed of a few basic types of particles: electrons, protons, neutrons, and photons, mostly, along with a tiny amount of more esoteric particle kinds. |
 | | Instead, she proposes, an equally good hypothesis is this: the mathematical laws manage to capture the effects of the operation of real capacities in nature, under certain restricted conditions; we may induce the existence of the same capacities outside the laboratory, but not the truth of the mathematical laws. |
| philsci-archive.pitt.edu /archive/00001076/00/Hoefer.doc (4875 words) |
|