|Literally true: a theory can only be literally true when its terms may not be re-interpreted in a given situation. On the other hand, a reinterpretation can make some theories and laws applicable to special cases, without being true or false.|
Books on Amazon
Literally Truth/Fraassen: the term has the function of excluding an addition like "correctly understood" ((s) > "well understood") - because a theory could be literally wrong or meaningless with the addition "well understood" - Anti-Realism: Thesis : the goal of science can be achieved without a theory being literally true.
Literally true/Fraassen: 1. The language is literally constructed - 2. The representation is therefore true - Science: Goal: to be true, but not literally. - Fraassen: Thesis: a good theory does not have to be true (Fraassen pro Anti-Realism) - it is literally not equal to truth functional - if we exclude literary constructions, we also exclude instrumentalism and positivism - these use literally understood formulations - a literary construction can be elaborated (e.g. to determine referents, e.g. reduction of thermodynamics on statistical mechanics), but it cannot change their logical relationships.
Literally true: excludes metaphors - Problem: the "demythologization" does not get the logical form.
Literally true/Fraassen: Dummett allows a non-literal interpretation for the quantum mechanics when he says that a sentence about the position of a particle cannot have a truth value simultaneously with one over the impulse - otherwise Strawson: e.g. "The present king of France is bald" here there is no non-literal construction of our language - again different: in everyday life people tend to "well understood..."
B. van Fraassen
The Scientific Image Oxford 1980