Just how controversial is evidential holism?

This paper is an examination of evidential holism, a prominent position in epistemology and the philosophy of science which claims that experiments only ever confirm or refute entire theories. The position is historically associated with W.V. Quine, and it is at once both popular and notorious, as well as being largely under-described. But even though there’s no univocal statement of what holism is or what it does, philosophers have nevertheless made substantial assumptions about its content and its truth. Moreover they have drawn controversial and important conclusions from these assumptions. In this paper I distinguish three types of evidential holism and argue that the most oft-cited and controversial thesis is entirely unmotivated. The other two theses are much overlooked, but are well-motivated and free from controversial implications.

Evidential Holism and Indispensability Arguments

The indispensability argument is a method for showing that abstract mathematical objects exist (call this mathematical Platonism). Various versions of this argument have been proposed (§1). Lately, commentators seem to have agreed that a holistic indispensability argument (§2) will not work, and that an explanatory indispensability argument is the best candidate. In this paper I argue that the dominant reasons for rejecting the holistic indispensability argument are mistaken. This is largely due to an overestimation of the consequences that follow from evidential holism. Nevertheless, the holistic indispensability argument should be rejected, but for a different reason (§3)—in order that an indispensability argument relying on holism can work, it must invoke an unmotivated version of evidential holism. Such an argument will be unsound. Correcting the argument with a proper construal of evidential holism means that it can no longer deliver mathematical Platonism as a conclusion: such an argument for Platonism will be invalid. I then show how the reasons for rejecting the holistic indispensability argument importantly constrain what kind of account of explanation will be permissible in explanatory versions (§4).

EFFECT OF EXERCISE ON THE NASAL TRANSMUCOSAL POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE IN PATIENTS WITH CYSTIC-FIBROSIS AND NORMAL SUBJECTS

Background - Normal subjects have a negative nasal transmucosal potential difference (TPD) at rest which becomes more negative with exercise. Patients with cystic fibrosis have a more negative resting nasal TPD than controls. The present study was designed to determine the effects of exercise on the TPD of patients with cystic fibrosis.

Familial ossification of the stylohyoid ligament in a three generation family--a new clinical entity displaying autosomal dominant inheritance

Ossification of the stylohyoid ligament is very common in the Caucasian population. More than 9000 descriptions of apparently isolated case reports on PubMed have been cited over the last 20 years, often associated with an incidental finding on imaging after neck trauma. No cases of familial ossification have been described. We document a family with several affected members, each with an ossified stylohyoid ligament, confirming that ossification may be hereditary in some families and is most likely due to an autosomal dominant gene.