You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Genuine Possibilities in the Scientific Past and How to Spot Them
Vol. 99, No. 3 (September 2008), pp. 568-575
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/591715
Page Count: 8
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
ABSTRACT The extent to which we take counterfactual history seriously depends on how well grounded we take the relevant possibilities to be. Beginning with a general consideration of the relationship between conceivability and possibility, this essay examine the grounds on which these alternative histories might be based. Drawing on examples from physics, such as the Bohmian version of quantum theory and the parastatistics approach to quarks, it suggests that such grounds are not as firm as might be thought and that further work is required in both the history and the philosophy of science before the putative alternatives can be taken as “genuine” possibilities.
© 2008 by The History of Science Society. All rights reserved.