Have measurements done with modern machinery (Atlas detector, Icecube neutrino observatory, etc.) made the human intellect cross the Kantian

The claim that *unknowable relata are primitive*—a core tenet of standard Epistemic Structural Realism (ESR) as articulated by John Worrall and rooted in Bertrand Russell—posits that unobservable entities (relata) exist inherently as intrinsic, self-subsisting primitives, but that scientific theories inform us *only* about the mathematical relations (structure) holding among them. The strongest, most rigorous objection against this claim asserts that positing unobservable intrinsic relata while declaring their intrinsic natures unknowable creates an unstable metaphysical commitments-to-epistemology mismatch. This mismatch exposes the view to formal trivialization via the **Newman Objection** and logical incoherence regarding the nature of causal interactions. --- ### Formal Premise-and-Inference Structure 1. **Premise 1 (The Relational Nature of Knowledge):** Standard ESR holds that empirical science accesses unobservables solely through formal, structural, or mathematical relations (e.g., via Ramsey sentences or second-order isomorphic mappings). 2. **Premise 2 (The Causal Efficacy Requirement):** For unobservable relata to be posited as primitive physical entities (rather than mere abstract mathematical placeholders), they must possess causal properties that generate observational consequences. 3. **Premise 3 (The Newman Instability / Loss of Realist Content):** As proved by M.H.A. Newman (1928), any formal structural claim made about a set of unobservable relata reduces to a purely logical statement about cardinality. If the intrinsic natures of the relata are completely unknowable, any purely abstract structure $W$ trivially holds for those relata provided the set has the requisite cardinality $N$. 4. **Inference:** Therefore, ESR cannot simultaneously maintain that unobservable relata have unknowable intrinsic natures *and* claim to provide a non-trivial, genuinely realist account of scientific knowledge. It either collapses into structural empiricism/agnosticism or must concede that we *do* know the First-Order Causal Natures of the relata. --- ### Counterevidence and Technical Counterexamples #### 1. Formal Logic Counterexample: The Newman Objection (1928) Max Newman demonstrated that if a theory specifies only the formal/abstract structural properties of a domain of unobservable relata whose intrinsic natures are unknowable, the theory's empirical assertion reduces to: *"There exists a set of unobservable relata with cardinality $N$."* * **Analytical Impact:** Because set theory guarantees the existence of formal relations matching any logically consistent structure on a domain of cardinality $N$, ESR renders scientific theories true by formal necessity (modulo counting domain elements). Positing unobservable relata as primitive adds zero empirical or explanatory value beyond pure formal cardinality. #### 2. Metaphysical & Physical Counterevidence: Causal Realism (Psillos, Chakravartty) Stathis Psillos (1999, 2001) and Anjan Chakravartty (1998, 2007) argue that we cannot know a relation without knowing something about the dispositional or causal properties of the relata that ground that relation. * **Documented Case (Mass and Charge in Electrodynamics):** We know an electron (a relatum) through its first-order causal properties—such as electric charge $e$ and mass $m$—which determine its trajectory in an electromagnetic field via the Lorentz force law $\mathbf{F} = q(\mathbf{E} + \mathbf{v} \times \mathbf{B})$. * **The Refutation:** Electric charge is not an abstract "unknowable nature"; it is a concrete dispositional property. If we know how an electron structurally interacts with a detector, we know its causal nature. Claiming the relatum's nature remains "unknowable" behind these causal properties relies on a discredited Kantian *ding an sich* (thing-in-itself) metaphysics that decouples an entity from its observable dispositional behavior. --- ### Hidden Dependencies and Boundary Conditions * **Hidden Dependency on Quasi-Kantian Dualism:** The thesis depends on an untenable separation between an entity's "structural relations" (which are known) and its "intrinsic nature" (which is unknowable). In physical practice, an unobservable entity’s intrinsic nature *is* defined by its set of invariant relational powers (e.g., spin, charge, rest mass). * **Boundary Condition Failure in Quantum Mechanics:** Modern quantum field theory (QFT) and quantum statistics further undermine "primitive unknowable relata." Under permutation symmetry (Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics), subatomic particles lack individual identity (haecceity). Positing "unknowable relata" as primitive individual objects assumes classical metaphysical individuality that contemporary fundamental physics directly rejects. --- ### Theoretical Tradeoffs and Evaluative Conclusion | Dimension | Epistemic SR ("Unknowable Relata") | Counter-Position (Semi-Realism / Ontic SR) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Epistemic Depth** | Shallow: Vulnerable to Newman's triviality proof. | Deep: Maps structural knowledge directly to concrete causal properties. | | **Metaphysical Commitment** | High: Posit mysterious *ding-an-sich* relata. | Calibrated: Eliminates intrinsic relata (Ontic SR) OR knows causal relata (Semi-Realism). | | **Historical Continuity** | Explains mathematical continuity across theory shifts. | Explains continuity via detection properties and structural invariance. | **Calibration of the Objection:** This argument does not refute the idea that science captures structural features of the universe across theoretical transitions. Rather, it **refutes the specific claim** that positing *unknowable primitive relata* is a viable metaphysical foundation for scientific realism. To remain coherent, structural realists must either: 1. Abandon primitive relata in favor of **Ontic Structural Realism (OSR)**, where relations or symmetry structures are ontologically fundamental without mysterious underlying relata, or 2. Shift to **Semi-Realism**, recognizing that the first-order dispositional/causal properties of relata are structurally knowable through experiment, thereby dissolving the claim that relata are unknowable.