@misc{Lexicon of Arguments, title = {Quotation from: Lexicon of Arguments – Concepts - Ed. Martin Schulz, 28 Mar 2024}, author = {Fraassen,Bas van}, subject = {Unobservables}, note = {I 54 Unobservability/Fraassen: as long as we do not forbid negation, we can express in an observation language that something is unobservable. And we can even express to a certain extent, how these unobserved entities are. E.g. Unobservable/Copenhagen interpretation: says that there are things that sometimes have a certain position and sometimes not. >Copenhagen Interpretation. N.B.: that was expressed without using a single theoretical term - e.g. the consequence of a theory: absolute space: would have neither position nor volume. - This has nothing to do with what exists in the observable world. >Ontology, >Existence. N.B.: a theory reduced to observation language would not be a description of a "part of the world". - ((s) because there is no meaningful separation observable/unobservable - Syntax/Fraassen: this is only a problem for the syntactic representation of theories. I 57 Limits of observability are empirical, not philosophical. >Observability. I 71 Unobservable/Truth/Theory/Fraassen: if a theory has implications about the unobservable, then evidence does not guarantee the truth of the theory. ((s) this practically always the case.) -Conversely, the evidence would never justify a conclusion that goes beyond this evidence. - Conclusions about what is observable also go beyond the evidence. >Evidence. I 72 Fraassen: There are no rationally compelling reasons to go beyond the evidence.}, note = { Fr I B. van Fraassen The Scientific Image Oxford 1980 }, file = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=276972} url = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=276972} }