A Precipice Below Which Lies Absurdity? Theories without a Spacetime and Scientific Understanding

TL;DR

This paper explores how scientific understanding can be achieved in theories of quantum gravity that lack spacetime, arguing that understanding is a skill-based process not dependent on visualization or traditional metaphysical assumptions.

Contribution

It adapts the contextual theory of scientific understanding to theories without spacetime, demonstrating that such theories can still be intelligible and meaningful.

Findings

Understanding does not require visualization tools.

Metaphysical preconceptions can hinder recognizing intelligibility without spacetime.

Examples show scientists can attain understanding without spacetime.

Abstract

While the relation between visualization and scientific understanding has been a topic of long-standing discussion, recent developments in physics have pushed the boundaries of this debate to new and still unexplored realms. For it is claimed that, in certain theories of quantum gravity, spacetime 'disappears': and this suggests that one may have sensible physical theories in which spacetime is completely absent. This makes the philosophical question whether such theories are intelligible, even more pressing. And if such theories are intelligible, the question then is how they manage to do so. In this paper, we adapt the contextual theory of scientific understanding, developed by one of us, to fit the novel challenges posed by physical theories without spacetime. We construe understanding as a matter of skill rather than just knowledge. The appeal is thus to understanding, rather than explanation, because we will be concerned with the tools that scientists have at their disposal for understanding these theories. Our central thesis is that such physical theories can provide scientific understanding, and that such understanding does not require spacetimes of any sort. Our argument consists of four consecutive steps: (a) We argue, from the general theory of scientific understanding, that although visualization is an oft-used tool for understanding, it is not a necessary condition for it; (b) we criticise certain metaphysical preconceptions which can stand in the way of recognising how intelligibility without spacetime can be had; (c) we catalogue tools for rendering theories without a spacetime intelligible; and (d) we give examples of cases in which understanding is attained without a spacetime, and explain what kind of understanding these examples provide.