Acuña, Pablo and Read, James (2025) Qualification and explanation in the dynamical/geometrical debate. [Preprint]
![[img]](https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
qda-pitt.pdf Download (274kB) |
Abstract
We consider the distinction between 'qualified' and 'unqualified' approaches introduced by Read (2020) in the context of the dynamical/geometrical debate. We show that one fruitful way in which to understand this distinction is in terms of what one takes the kinematically possible models of a given theory to represent; moreover, we show that the qualified/unqualified distinction is applicable not only to the geometrical approach (which is the case considered by Read (2020)), but also to the dynamical approach. Finally, having made these points, we connect them to other discussions of representation and of explanation in this corner of the literature.
| Export/Citation: | EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL |
| Social Networking: |
| Item Type: | Preprint | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creators: |
|
|||||||||
| Keywords: | dynamical approach; kinematics; dynamics; explanation; representation; geometry | |||||||||
| Subjects: | Specific Sciences > Physics > Relativity Theory Specific Sciences > Physics > Symmetries/Invariances |
|||||||||
| Depositing User: | Dr. James Read | |||||||||
| Date Deposited: | 16 Apr 2025 13:13 | |||||||||
| Last Modified: | 16 Apr 2025 13:13 | |||||||||
| Item ID: | 25079 | |||||||||
| Subjects: | Specific Sciences > Physics > Relativity Theory Specific Sciences > Physics > Symmetries/Invariances |
|||||||||
| Date: | 16 April 2025 | |||||||||
| URI: | https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/25079 |
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}