• Roberto Gronda
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 421)


This chapter deals with the issue of scientific realism. Traditionally, Dewey’s philosophy of science has been considered as a prototypical form of instrumentalism. On the contrary, I think Dewey is a scientific realist. My aim is to figure out what kind of scientific realism he embraces and defends in his texts. I reject the interpretation that Dewey’s scientific realism is a form of structural realism. Relying on the conclusions reached in the previous chapters, I outline the main features of what I call Dewey’s articulative realism, whose key assumption is the idea that the commitment to the existence of the entities postulated by our best scientific theories is a matter of the kind of activities that an agent is capable of undertaking.


Instrumentalism Ontological commitment Scientific objects Structural realism Structure Connection Relation Language Formulation Articulative realism 


  1. Brading, K., & Crull, E. (2017). Epistemic structural realism and Poincaré’s philosophy of science. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 7(1), 108–129.Google Scholar
  2. Demopoulos, W., & Friedman, M. (1985). Bertrand Russell’s “The analysis of matter”: Its historical context and contemporary interest. Philosophy of Science, 52(4), 621–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eddington, A. (1928). The nature of the physical world. New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
  4. Esfeld, M. (2004). Quantum entanglement and a metaphysics of relations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35(4), 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. French, S. (2014). The structure of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. French, S., & Ladyman, J. (2003). Remodelling structural realism: Quantum physics and the metaphysics of structure. Synthese, 136(1), 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. French, S., & Ladyman, J. (2010). In defence of ontic structural realism. In A. Bokulich & P. Bokulich (Eds.), Scientific structuralism (pp. 25–42). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2011). Dewey and the subject-matter of science. In J. Shook & P. Kurtz (Eds.), Dewey’s enduring impact: Essays on America’s philosopher (pp. 73–86). Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  9. Hildebrand, D. L. (2003). Beyond realism and antirealism: John Dewey and the neopragmatists. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ladyman, J. (1998). What is structural realism? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 29(3), 409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Laudan, L. (1981). A confutation of convergent realism. Philosophy of Science, 48(1), 19–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Massimi, M. (2010b). Structural realism: A neo-kantian perspective. In Scientific structuralism (pp. 1–23). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Morganti, M. (2004). On the preferability of epistemic structural realism. Synthese, 142(1), 81–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morganti, M. (2011). Is there a compelling argument for ontic structural realism? Philosophy of Science, 78(5), 1165–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pihlström, S. (2007). The realism issue from a Deweyan perspective. Americana. E-Journal of American Studies in Hungary, III(2), 1–28.Google Scholar
  16. Poincaré, H. (1905). Science and hypothesis. London: The Walter Scott Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  17. Psillos, S. (2001). Is structural realism possible? Philosophy of Science, 68(S3), S13–S24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Putnam, H. (1975). What is mathematical truth? In Mathematics, matter and method. Philosophical papers, Volume I (pp. 60–78). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction. An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Reichenbach, H. (1939). Dewey’s theory of science. In The philosophy of John Dewey (pp. 157–192). New York: Tudor Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  21. Rubeis, G. (2017). Beyond realism and antirealism? The strange case of Dewey’s instrumentalism. In Logical empiricism and pragmatism (Vienna circle institute yearbook, pp. 67–82). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Russell, B. (2001). The problems of philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Shook, J. (2002). Dewey and Quine on the logic of what there is. In T. Burke & R. Talisse (Eds.), Dewey’s logical theory. New studies and interpretations (pp. 93–118). Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Votsis, I. (2004). The upward path to structural realism. Philosophy of Science, 72(5), 1361–1372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Worrall, J. (1989). Structural realism: The best of both worlds? Dialectica, 43(1–2), 99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zahar, E. (2001). Poincare’s philosophy: From conventionalism to phenomenology. Chicago/ Lasalle: Open Court Publishing Co.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Gronda
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Civiltà e Forme del SapereUniversità di PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations