We were considering the following argument in my Metaphysics class:
- Scientific realism impedes the progress of fundamental physics.
- If a theory impedes the progress of a science, it's probably false.
- Fundamental physics is a science.
- Therefore, scientific realism is probably false.
There are other arguments involving (2). For instance, one might (perhaps incorrectly) think that dualism impedes the progress of neuroscience. But (2) is false, so that wouldn't give us significant evidence for the falsity of dualism.
I suppose one might try to distinguish between ways in which a theory can impede the progress of a science, and then some qualified version of (2) would still be true. That would be interesting, but I don't know to do this.