From Representation to Reality

Abstract

This dissertation examines the nature of scientific exegesis, i.e., the task of determining what science says about the world. I argue that nearly all contemporary theories of scientific exegesis are untenable. My primary argument for this centers around a phenomena that I call `representational artifacts'. Representational artifacts are, to a first approximation, features of scientific representations that do not directly correspond to elements of the physical world. After exploring the difficulties that such artifacts raise in chapter two, the remaining chapters consider what representational artifacts reveal about the nature of scientific exegesis.