Paraconsistency, Pluralistic Models and Reasoning in Climate Science

Scientific inquiry is typically focused on particular questions about particular objects and properties.  This leads to a multiplicity of models which, even when they draw on a single, consistent body of concepts and principles, often employ different methods and assumptions to model different systems.  Pluralists have remarked on how scientists draw on different assumptions to model different systems, different aspects of systems and systems under different conditions and defended the value of distinct, incompatible models within science at any given time. (Cartwright, 1999; Chang, 2012) Paraconsistentists have proposed logical strategies to avoid trivialization when inconsistencies arise by a variety of means.(Batens, 2001; Brown, 1990; Brown, 2002)  Here we examine how chunk and permeate, a simple approach to paraconsistent reasoning which avoids heterodox logic by confining commitments to separate contexts in which reasoning with them is taken to be reliable while allowing ‘permeation’ of some conclusions into other contexts, can help to systematize pluralistic reasoning across the boundaries of plural contexts, using regional climate models as an example.(Benham et al., 2014; Brown & Priest 2004, 2015)  The result is a kind of unity for science—but a unity achieved by the constrained exchange of specified information between different contexts, rather than the closure of all commitments under some paraconsistent consequence relation.

[1]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Note on Paraconsistency and the Logic of Fractions , 2014 .

[2]  David L. Hull,et al.  Lord Kelvin and the Age of the Earth. , 1977 .

[3]  Stephen Mumfordt The Dappled World: a Study of the Boundaries of Science By Nancy Cartwright Cambridge University Press, 1999, £35.00, £12.95. , 2000, Philosophy.

[4]  Bryson Brown On the Preservation of Reliability , 2016 .

[5]  Anjan Chakravartty,et al.  The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science , 2000 .

[6]  G. Priest,et al.  Chunk and permeate II: Bohr’s hydrogen atom , 2015 .

[7]  F. A. Lindemann,et al.  The Age of the Earth , 1893, Nature.

[8]  D. Batens A General Characterization of Adaptive Logics , 2001 .

[9]  John D. Norton A Paradox in Newtonian Cosmology II , 1993 .

[10]  Dale Jacquette A companion to philosophical logic , 2002 .

[11]  Mandy Eberhart,et al.  The Scientific Image , 2016 .

[12]  Peter Vickers Understanding Inconsistent Science , 2013 .

[13]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of the history of logic , 2004 .

[14]  Roy Sorensen,et al.  A Brief History of the Paradox: Philosophy and the Labyrinths of the Mind , 2003 .

[15]  M. Bradie :Re-Engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings: Piecewise Approximations to Reality , 2008 .

[16]  Graham Priest,et al.  Chunk and permeate III: the Dirac delta function , 2014, Synthese.

[17]  Hasok Chang Is water H[2]O? : evidence, realism and pluralism , 2012 .

[18]  Bryson Brown,et al.  How to be realistic about inconsistency in science , 1990 .

[19]  René Laprise,et al.  Regional climate modelling , 2008, J. Comput. Phys..