2024/12/14 by Hanti Lin, Lin, Hanti
Arts and Humanities · #FOS: Computer and information sciences #Machine Learning (cs.LG) #Methodology (stat.ME) #Other Statistics (stat.OT) #Philosophy and History of Science
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.10643
openalex publication_date 2024/12/14 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
The debate between scientific realism and anti-realism remains at a stalemate, making reconciliation seem hopeless. Yet, important work remains: exploring a common ground, even if only to uncover deeper points of disagreement and, ideally, to benefit both sides of the debate. I propose such a common ground. Specifically, many anti-realists, such as instrumentalists, have yet to seriously engage with Sober's call to justify their preferred version of Ockham's razor through a positive account. Meanwhile, realists face a similar challenge: providing a non-circular explanation of how their version of Ockham's razor connects to truth. The common ground I propose addresses these challenges for both sides; the key is to leverage the idea that everyone values some truths and to draw on insights from scientific fields that study scientific inference -- namely, statistics and machine learning. This common ground also isolates a distinctively epistemic root of the irreconcilability in the realism debate.