Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wlg5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T09:55:31.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response to Belot's “Whose Devil? Which Details?”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Robert W. Batterman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I respond to Belot's argument and defend the view that sometimes ‘fundamental theories’ are explanatorily inadequate and need to be supplemented with certain aspects of less fundamental ‘theories emeritus’.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 154 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

I would like to thank Gordon Belot for writing his thought-provoking paper and for discussions about this reply. I would also like to thank Mark Wilson for helpful comments.

References

Batterman, Robert W. (1992), “Explanatory Instability”, Explanatory Instability 26:325–348.Google Scholar
Batterman, Robert W. (2002), The Devil in the Details: Asymptotic Reasoning in Explanation, Reduction, and Emergence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Batterman, Robert W. (2003), “Falling Cats, Parallel Parking, and Polarized Light”, Falling Cats, Parallel Parking, and Polarized Light 34:527–557.Google Scholar
Batterman, Robert W. (forthcoming), “Critical Phenomena and Breaking Drops: Infinite Idealizations in Physics”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics.Google Scholar
Belot, Gordon (2005), “Whose Devil? Which Details?”, Whose Devil? Which Details? 72:128–153.Google Scholar
Healey, Richard (2001), “On the Reality of Gauge Potentials”, On the Reality of Gauge Potentials 68:432–455.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1965), “Aspects of Scientific Explanation”, in Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press, 331–496.Google Scholar
Redhead, Michael (2004), “Discussion Note: Asymptotic Reasoning”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 35B (3): 527–530.Google Scholar
Wilson, Mark (2003), “Comments on The Devil in the Details, unpublished paper given at the Pacific APA 2003.Google Scholar