The aim of this paper is to articulate, discuss in detail and criticise Reichenbach’s sophisticated and complex argument for
scientific realism. Reichenbach’s argument has two parts. The first part aims to show how there can be reasonable belief in
unobservable entities, though the truth of claims about them is not given directly in experience. The second part aims to
extent the argument of the first part to the case of realism about the external world, conceived of as a world of independently
existing entities distinct from sensations. It is argued that the success of the first part depends on a change of perspective,
where unobservable entities are viewed as projective complexes vis-à-vis their observable symptoms, or effects. It is also
argued that there is an essential difference between the two parts of the argument, which Reichenbach comes (somewhat reluctantly)
to accept.
Keywords Scientific realism – Reichenbach – Bayesianism – Base-rate fallacy – Explanation
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the conference A Philosopher of Science in Istanbul: Hans Reichenbach, Bogazici University, Istanbul, May 2008. Many thanks to Gurol Irzik and Elliott Sober for the kind invitation to participate
and to the participants for very useful comments.