Conatus: THIRD EDITION by Tom Wallace - HTML preview

C O N A T U S

had perfect empirical knowledge. This would grant us some clear choices about understanding the universe.

Either: We have perfect observation but we cannot find any theory that explains everything we observe. (This is sometimes described as the universe being ‘under-determined’ — not enough theory to fit the facts.)

Or: We have perfect observation, and only one theory that explains it all.

Or: We have perfect observation and more than one theory that fits the facts, and are unable to decide between them. (This is sometimes described as the universe being ‘over-determined’ — too many theories to fit the facts.)

The second of the options above — that we have just one theory to fit the facts — is essentially the dream of science. Perhaps this is just not possible. The map is not the territory.

Early on in the book, we noted the difference between necessary and contingent truth. The role of philosophy is to discover absolutely necessary truths. The role of science, arguably, is to accept contingency in our knowledge. Despite this contingency, there is progress in science. There is even progress in philosophy! The ‘official’ truth (scientific, historic and in terms of news-gathering and reporting) is always out there in the background of our societies. We sit on a great mountain of accumulated knowledge — it is best never to forget that! But, for now at least, we just

205