Scientific realism as the most reasonable choice?

Abstract:

Scientific realism, roughly, is the view that successful scientific theories are (at least partially or approximately) true. Is this the most reasonable stance to as-sume towards science? The no-miracle argument says it is: the stunning empiri-cal success of our scientific theories is in need of an explanation, and (partial or approximate) truth seems to be the best explanation that we have at hand. The aim of this paper is to briefly reconstruct the trajectory of the success–to–truth inference, to critically analyze it in its latest formulation, and to sketch a possible way to go in order to make it a safer inference.