Abstract
Debates about the ontological implications of the general theory of relativity have long oscillated between spacetime substantivalism and relationism. I evaluate such debates by claiming that we need a third option, which I refer to as “structural spacetime realism.” Such a tertium quid sides with the relationists in defending the relational nature of the spacetime structure, but joins the substantivalists in arguing that spacetime exists, at least in part, independently of particular physical objects and events, the degree of “independence” being given by the extent to which geometrical laws exist “over and above” physical events exemplifying them. By showing that structural spacetime realism is the natural outcome of a semantic, model-theoretic approach to the nature of scientific theories, I conclude by arguing that the notion of partial isomorphic representation is the most plausible candidate to connect spacetime models with reality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
H. G. Alexander, ed., The Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence (New York, Barnes and Noble, 1956).
D. Armstrong, Universals and Scientific Realism (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989).
S. Auyang, How is Quantum Field Theory Possible? (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995).
G. Belot, “Why general relativity does need an interpretation?,” PSA 96, Part I, S80–88 (1996).
J. Butterfield, “The hole truth,” Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 40, 1–28 (1989).
T. Y. Cao, Conceptual Developments of 20th Century Field Theories (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1997).
M. Capek, The Philosophical impact of Contemporary Physics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1961).
A. Chakravartty, “Semirealism,” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 29, 391–408 (1998).
M. L. Dalla Chiara and G. Toraldo, “A logical analysis of physical theories,” Riv. Nuovo Cimento, Ser. 2, 1–3, 1-20 (1973).
R. DiSalle, “On dynamics, indiscernibility and spacetime ontology,” Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 45, 265–287 (1994).
R. DiSalle, “Spacetime theory as physical geometry,” Erkenntnis 42, 317–337 (1995).
J. Earman, Spacetime and World Enough (Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1989).
J. Earman and J. Norton, “What price substantivalism: The hole story,” Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 38, 515–525 (1987).
A. Eddington, “A generalization of Weyl's theory of the electromagnetic and the gravitational fields,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A 99, 104–122 (1921).
A. Einstein, “The foundations of the general theory of relativity,” in The Principle of Relativity, A. Einstein et al., eds. (1952), transl. by W. Perret and G. B. Jeffery (New York, Dover, 1916).
A. Einstein, “Ether and the theory of relativity,” Sidelights on General Relativity (Dover, New York, 1923), pp. 1–24.
H. Field, Science Without Numbers: a Defense of Nominalism (Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1980).
S. French, “Models and mathematics in physics: The role of group theory,” in From Physics to Philosophy, J. Butterfield and C. Pagonis, eds. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999).
M. Friedman, Foundations of Space-Time Theories (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1983).
R. Giere, Explaining Science (Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1988).
R. Healey, “Substance, modality and spacetime,” Erkenntnis 42, 287–316 (1995).
C. Hoefer, “The metaphysics of space-time substantivalism,” J. Phil. 43(1), 5–27 (1996).
C. Hoefer, “Absolute versus relational space-time: For better or for worse, the debate goes on,” Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 49(3), 451–469 (1998).
J. Ladyman, “What is structural realism,” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 29, 409–424 (1998).
T. Maudlin, “The essence of space time,” in Philosophy of Science Association 1988, Vol. II, A. Fine and J. Leplin, eds. (East Lansing, Michigan, 1988), pp. 82–91.
T. Maudlin, “Substances and space-time: What Aristotle would have said to Einstein,” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 21, 531–561 (1990).
D. Mayo, Errors and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996).
B. Mundy, “Relational theories of Euclidean space and Minkowski spacetime,” Phil. Sci. 50, 205–226 (1983).
M. Pauri, “Oggettivitäe realtä,” in L'oggettivitädella conoscenza scientifica, F. Minazzi, ed. (Milano, Angeli, 1996), pp. 100–112.
S. Psillos, “Is structural realism the best of both worlds?,” Dialectica 49(1), 15–47 (1995).
A. A. Robb, A Theory of Time and Space (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1914).
C. Rovelli, “Half-way through the woods: Contemporary research in space and time,” in The Cosmos of Science, J. Earman and J. Norton, eds. (Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 1997), pp. 180–224.
R. Rynasiewicz, “Rings, holes and substantivalism: On the program of Leibniz algebras,” Phil. Sci. 59, 572–589 (1992).
R. Rynasiewicz, “The lessons of the hole argument,” Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 45, 407–436 (1994).
R. Rynasiewicz, “Absolute versus relational space-time: An outmoded debate?,” J. Phil. 43(1), 279–306 (1996).
W. Salmon, “Scientific explanation,” in Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, M. Salmon, J. Earman et al., eds. (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 1992), pp. 7–41.
D. Shapere, “The origin and nature of time,” manuscript.
J. Stachel, “The meaning of general covariance,” in Philosophical Problems of the Internal and the External World, J. Earman, A. Janis, G. Massey, N. Rescher, eds. (Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 1993), pp. 129–160.
H. Stein, “Newtonian spacetime,” Texas Quarterly 10, 174–200 (1967).
H. Stein, “Yes, but...: Some skeptical remarks on realism and antirealism,” Dialectica 43, 46–65 (1989).
F. Suppe, The Structure of Scientific Theories, 2nd edn. (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1977).
F. Suppe, The Semantic Conception of Theories and Scientific Realism (University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1989).
P. Suppes, “What is a scientific theory,” in Philosophy of Science today, S. Morgenbesser, ed. (Basic Books, New York, 1967), pp. 55–67.
W. Unruh, “Time, gravity and quantum mechanics,” in Time's Arrow Today, S. Savitt, ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995), pp. 23–65.
B. van Fraassen, The Scientific Image (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1980).
H. Weyl, Raum, Zeit, Materie (Berlin, Springer, 1918a).
H. Weyl, “Gravitation und Elektrizität,” Preuhische Akad. Wiss. Sitzungber., 465–478 (1918b).
J. A. Wheeler, Geometrodynamics (New York, Academic, 1962).
J. Worrall, “Structural realism,” Dialectica 43(1-2), 99-124.
E. Zahar, “Poincaré's structural realism and his logic of discovery,” in Henri Poincaré: Science and Philosophy, J. L. Greffe, G. Heinzmann, and K. Lorenz, eds. (Berlin, Akademie, 1994), pp. 45–68.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dorato, M. Substantivalism, Relationism, and Structural Spacetime Realism. Foundations of Physics 30, 1605–1628 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026442015519
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026442015519