1.Ioan MunteanIndiana University-Purdue University,Fort Wayne http://imuntean.net1

2. Science and metaphysics, again The relation between the new analytic metaphysicsand contemporary science Several approaches: Historical approach Division of labor approach The new scientism (Maudlin, Ladyman, Van Fraassen) Similarities (LA Paul, P. Godfrey-Smith) Differences (Ladyman, Maudlin, present paper) 2 3. Aims of this project Focus on differences, not on similarities Metaphysical modality is essentially different thanscientific modality At the core, there is a difference in representation andtheory choice, albeit the language is similar Differences are as useful as analogies and help theadvancement of metaphysics. It is an argument in metaphysics methodology and itsresemblance to scientific methodology 3 4. What is the new metaphysics? Chronologically, comes after Naming and Necessity Conceptually, originates in Lewis, Armstrong The new systematic metaphysics orients itself towardsmodality and existence The new analytic metaphysics is not centered on ordinarylanguage, but on the practice of philosophy itself A newer new analytic metaphysics is at the horizon: Grounding (Schaffer) Fundamentalism Back to language? Sider Meta-metaphysic-sy projects 4 5. Strong antinaturalism MetaphysicsScience The necessaryThe actualThe possible 5 6. Weak antinaturalism: overlappingThe possibleThe actualThenecessary 6 7. Division of Labor Division of Labor: metaphysics charts the domain of objectivepossibility through reason; science explores actual reality throughempirical methods. Metaphysics deals in possibilities(E. J. Lowe) C. Callender (about the division of labor): whereas scientistsexcavate dusty field sites and mix potions in laboratories to tellus which states of affairs are actual, metaphysicians areconcerned with what is and isnt metaphysically possible. Metaphysics is after something bigger and more abstract, thestructure of metaphysical modality. What it investigates can tellus about the actual world, but only incidentally because theactual world is one possible world of many Modal truth is different than truth based on evidence7 8. Old fashioned scientism Russell: make philosophy look more exact Make it look like mathematics or science. Modality and certainty: Philosophy diminishes our feeling of certainty as to what things are, but greatly increases our knowledge as to what they may be. Russell 8 9. The new scientism New scientism: In the light of contemporary theoriesin physics, metaphysicians need to reform theirfundamental ontology. Van Fraassen, Ladyman&Ross&Spurrett, Maudlin Science is not only a supply of counterexamples tometaphysics But the source of change and progress in metaphysics 9 10. Some reconciliatory projectsA. Do not aim to reform metaphysics, but inform it scientifically: French, Callender: metaphysics is best when informed by good science, and science is best when informed by good metaphysics;B. (Re)situate metaphysics in meta-scienceC. Find similarities between science and metaphysicsD. Find differences and show they are central to both science and metaphysicsE. (Re)situate science in meta-metaphysicsI argue here that D and E are more attractive than CB. is well-explored in the philosophy of science (Friedman)A. is vague 10 11. A. Informing metaphysics Metaphysical statements can be tested by science(Hawley, 2005) Metaphysics is underdetermined by sciences(French, 2009) 11 12. B. Metaphysics and meta-science Metaphysics is meta-science Friedman: the philosophical articulation of what we might call metaparadigms or meta-frameworks for revolutionary science capable of motivating and sustaining the transition to a new scientific paradigm. 12 13. C. SimilaritySome similarities. They may share:I. their subject-matter: the mind-independent realityII. (some) ideals: simplicity, unification, expressibility, symmetry, etc.III. (some) methods: IBE, modeling (LA Paul, P. Godfrey-Smith)IV. (some) concepts: causation, laws, necessity, possibility, structure, realismThe strong resemblance view: keep I (perhaps, partially, II-IV)Weak resemblance view: reject I, but accept II, III or IV and othercombinationsI focus here on a weak resemblance view that keeps III and IV13 14. I. The science-metaphysicscontinuum For Humeans, metaphysics and science are part of the best systematization of the world (Callender) we can treat metaphysical claims as parts of the Best Theory that are more abstract and distantly related to experiment than the bulk of the theory, that is, science. (Callender 2011 47) Callender: modalities are not independent of scientific modalities 14 15. II. Scientific theories andmetaphysical doctrines They try to explain and unify They aim to simplicity They explain (Sider 2009); metaphysicians even usethe inference to the best explanation for genuinemodal realism (Shalkowski 2010) They both use underdetermination (but this iscontroversial in metaphysics, Ladyman 2012) 15 16. III. Modeling in science andmetaphysics metaphysics and science share the same method, (butnot the same subject matter) They both build models: LA Paul, P. Godfrey-Smith They use confirmation: ordinary experience plays therole of experimental data in metaphysics 16 17. Models in science The simplified view: (P. Godfrey Smith, St French&Costa) a model is a set of objects and relations among them They act as interpreting structures for a mathematical theory A theory is true when there is an partial or totalisomorphism between the model and the world Models uses abstracts and idealization: In building models, scientists ignore aspects of the worldand structures of the theory. Scientists do incorporate false statements in their models 17 18. Modeling in metaphysics metaphysical methods used to make claims about theworld can be similar to scientific methods used tomake claims about the world, but that the subjects ofmetaphysics are not the subjects of science Paul 2012 metaphysical doctrines = models or classes of models a class of models, where the models are composed oflogical, modal and other relations relating variablesthat represent n-adic properties, objects, and otherentities LA Paul 2012 idealization and abstraction are important . 18 19. Idealization and abstraction abstraction and idealization are used in theory-building in metaphysics. Exemple: Idealization in the metaphysics of causation(when ignoring non-relevant causes).19 20. Modality and testing inmetaphysics 1. Test a theory by considering the actual world or closepossible worlds with fictional, physically possiblesituations. 2 Look for possible worlds that contradict the theory.Are there such possible worlds? 20 21. Ideal in metaphysics (GodfreySmith 2012) Project 1: describe the language and our thinking Project 2: describe a part of the world Project 3: relate project 1 and 2. Project 4: correct project 1 based on alternatives.21 22. Features of metaphysical modality Robustness: are there results robust across variouspossible models? P. G-Smith: happens in metaphysicalmodeling. I disagree Tractability. In metaphysical model? I do not see itthat wayP. Godfrey-Smith 22 23. IV Concept-similarity in science andmetaphysics Causation is similar in science and metaphysics (but it is in itselfproblematic) Structures are used in metaphysics, science, mathematics is apretty uniform way Laws of nature are less similar, but still you can see them on acontinuum Mereological concepts are even more different: parthood,recombination, com-possibility, composition, constitution What about possibility as used in science and metaphysics? I show they are not similar at all, despite what is in general suggested Many scientists embrace uncritically the concept of possibility from metaphysics Metaphysicians dismiss any modal attempt coming from science23 24. D. Differences in modeling How much the theory involves the unobservable, theindirectly confirmable, and the abstract; and in how many different, competing models maymaximize the theoretical virtues while doing anadequate job of saving the phenomena. Paul 2012 More theories to choose in metaphysics than in science. Scientific models are constrained empirically. 24 25. IV. modalities I argue that a different concept of modality is at workin metaphysical modeling than in scientific modeling Despite appearances, different modal concepts are atwork in scientific modeling and modeling inmetaphyscs25 26. Modality in physics Does quantum mechanics (Everettians) presuposes adifferent modalities than the standard metaphysics? Physical modalities are different than metaphysicalmodalities, so were back to the division of labor. There is a new sense of modality in Everettian QM Symmetries do act as limitations of modality. Path integral as well as principle of least action arerelated to modality (Butterfield) The multiverse modality is altogether another story.26 27. Modality in metaphysical modeling Causation: causal talk depends on contrasts betweenwhat actually occurs and the normal course of events(Hitchcock and Knobe 2009) Philosophy uses fiction and the imagination, thought-experiments and imaginary cases If a metaphysical model uses fictional entities andimaginative situations, thought experiments andsuchlike, it uses modality But is this similar enough to modality used in scientificmodels?27 28. Structure and world in scientificmodality Structure limits possibility The world also is a limit of the scientific possibility28 29. Fictions Fictional entities in science are constrained by (a) atheoretical structure, and (b) the structure of theworld Fictional entities in metaphysics are constrained byconceivability. This is a major difference. 29 30. Abstractions and idealizations I argue they are fundamentally different in science andmetaphysics. The mathematical structure needed in a theory doesnot exist30 31. Caveats Perhaps models in science are more autonomous thanstated here Perhaps a theoretical structure is not needed (be itmathematical or not). Why models? Perhaps a more syntactic-view friendlyapproach would find more similarities between thetwo modalities. Perhaps mathematical models are missing from thepicture. Put back mathematics where it belongs. Perhaps logical models? 31 32. Unintended consequences I may need to decouple possibility from necessity. Metaphysical possibility is dual to metaphysicalnecessity. Scientific possibility (as used in modeling) is notcouple to scientific necessity (be it laws of nature,regularities, generalizations.32 33. Conclusion Different modality concepts are fruitful in metaphysics Can instigate new research directions within metaphysics33