Article  "Science does not describe reality" (philosophy of science)

https://iai.tv/articles/science-does-not..._auid=2020

INTRO: We think of scientists creating models to explain reality. The effectiveness of these models, be it Einstein’s Theory of Relativity or Darwin’s Theory of Evolution makes us believe in them. Many scientists and philosophers argue taking them as explanations means these models are true. But this idea of explanation is as superfluous to theories of science as an orgasm is to procreation, argues Bas van Fraassen..... (MORE - details)

RELATED: Scientific Realism and Antirealism (IEP) ..... Scientific Realism (SEP) ...... Constructive Empiricism (Bas van Fraassen, SEP)

(Jan 30, 2024 06:22 PM)C C Wrote: https://iai.tv/articles/science-does-not..._auid=2020

INTRO: We think of scientists creating models to explain reality. The effectiveness of these models, be it Einstein’s Theory of Relativity or Darwin’s Theory of Evolution makes us believe in them. Many scientists and philosophers argue taking them as explanations means these models are true. But this idea of explanation is as superfluous to theories of science as an orgasm is to procreation, argues Bas van Fraassen..... (MORE - details)

RELATED: Scientific Realism and Antirealism (IEP) ..... Scientific Realism (SEP) ...... Constructive Empiricism (Bas van Fraassen, SEP)

Five years ago you posted a ‘simple quantum games’ thread. In a response I used the I Dream of Jeannie analogy, if her world was the real world then whatever she winks into existence would have a scientific explanation. Even if it wasn’t the real world, a simulation, it stills has an explanation.

A simulator, whatever it is, should also have an explanation. I don’t know how it can be any other way. If God himself did a Jeannie then it has a scientific explanation. I wish religions would devote more time to find out how God does it at least. Then there’s God himself.

I think you said something about the Russian dolls back then. These topics seem to head in that direction.

Has anybody thought this: somewhere along the line someone, maybe a civilization aeons old, messed with time and we’re just one of countless butterfly effects.

Rant ..
Reality is ineffable. It is what it is. The map is not the territory - is that a surprise? Mathematical models can be close, sometimes very close and sometimes not so much. Philosophy isn't just the wrong language for describing reality - it only exists and has any meaning in a 'philosophy universe' which, almost by definition, doesn't include reality.