Penelope Maddy's objections to the indispensability argument are considered. In two of her objections – the objection from scientific fictions and the objection from the role of mathematics in scientific theories – it is argued that much of the force is derived from taking an implausible reading of naturalism. Moreover, this reading of naturalism is not endorsed by either Quine or Maddy. It is also argued that the third of Maddy's objections – the mathematical practice objection – turns on a misconception about Quinean holism.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.