The Uses of Truth: Is There Room for Reconciliation of Factivist and Non-Factivist Accounts of Scientific Understanding?

References

• Ashby, N. 2002. “Relativity and the Global Positioning System.” Physics Today 55, 41–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangu, S. 2017. “Is Understanding Factive? Unificationism and History of Science.” Balkan Journal of Philosophy 9: 35–44.
   Google Scholar
• Baumberger, C., C. Beisbart, and G. Brun. 2017. “What is Understanding? An Overview of Recent Debates in Epistemology and Philosophy of Science.” In Explaining Understanding. New Perspectives from Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, edited by S. R. Grimm, G. Baumberger, and S. Ammon, 1–34. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bokulich, A. 2008. “Can Classical Structures Explain Quantum Phenomena?” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59: 217–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandom, R. 1994. Making It Explicit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brandom, R. 2000. Articulating Reasons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brigandt, I. 2010. “Scientific Reasoning is Material Inference: Combining Confirmation, Discovery, and Explanation.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24: 31–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, L. J. 1992. An Essay on Belief and Acceptance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Regt, H. W. 2015. “Scientific Understanding: Truth or Dare?” Synthese 192: 3781–3797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Regt, H. W., and C. Baumberger. 2019. “What is Scientific Understanding and How Can It Be Achieved?” In What is Scientific Knowledge? An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology of Science, edited by K. McCain, and K. Kampourakis. 66–81. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• De Regt, H. W., and V. Gijsbers. 2017. “How False Theories Can Yield Genuine Understanding.” In Explaining Understanding. New Perspectives from Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, edited by S. R. Grimm, G. Baumberger, and S. Ammon, 50–75. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, H. E. 2009. “Reintroducing Prediction to Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 76: 444–463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle, Y., S. Egan, N. Graham, and K. Khalifa. 2019. “Non-Factive Understanding: A Statement and Defense.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 50: 345–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elgin, C. Z. 2004. “True Enough.” Philosophical Issues, Epistemology 14: 113–131.
   Google Scholar
• Elgin, C. Z. 2009. “Is Understanding Factive?” In Epistemic Value, edited by D. Pritchard, A. Miller, and A. Haddock, 322–330. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elgin, C. Z. 2017. True Enough. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grimm, S. R. 2006. “Is Understanding a Species of Knowledge?” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57: 515–535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannon, M. 2021. “Recent Work in the Epistemology of Understanding.” American Philosophical Quarterly 58: 269–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hempel, C. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hetherington, N. S. 1980. “Sirius B and the Gravitational Redshift – A Historical Review.” Quarterly Journal Royal Astronomical Society 21: 246–252.
   Google Scholar
• Khalifa, K. 2017. Understanding, Explanation, and Scientific Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Khalifa, K. 2020. “Understanding, Truth, and Epistemic Goals.” Philosophy of Science 87: 944–956.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kvanvig, J. 2003. The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawler, I. 2021. “Scientific Understanding and Felicitous Legitimate Falsehoods.” Synthese 198: 6859–6887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizrahi, M. 2012. “Idealizations and Scientific Understanding.” Philosophical Studies 160: 237–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, J. D. 2003. “A Material Theory of Induction.” Philosophy of Science 70: 647–670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, J. D. 2021. The Material Theory of Induction. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.
   Google Scholar
• Potochnik, A. 2017. Idealization and the Aims of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pritchard, D. 2007. “Recent Work on Epistemic Value.” American Philosophical Quarterly 44: 85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rice, C. 2016. “Factive Scientific Understanding Without Accurate Representation.” Biology & Philosophy 31: 81–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggs, W. 2009. “Understanding, Knowledge, and the Meno Requirement.” In Epistemic Value, edited by D. Pritchard, A. Miller, and A. Haddock, 331–338. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, L. 2021. “The Truth About Better Understanding?” Erkenntnis. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00380-2
   Google Scholar
• Ryle, G. 1949. The Concept of Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salmon, W. 1978. “Why Ask, ‘Why?’? An Inquiry Concerning Scientific Explanation.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 51: 683–705.
   Google Scholar
• Sellars, W. 1953. “Inference and Meaning.” Mind 62: 313–338.
   Google Scholar
• Strevens, M. 2008. Depth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suárez, M. 2004. “An Inferential Conception of Scientific Representation.” Philosophy of Science 71: 767–779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valente, M. B. 2018. “Einstein’s Redshift Derivations: Its History From 1907 to 1921.” Circumscribere: International Journal for the History of Science 22: 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Woodward, J. 2003. Making Things Happen. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zagrebski, L. 2001. “Recovering Understanding.” In Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue, edited by M. Steup, 235–252. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar