Are structural properties actually structuralist according to Quine/Putnam.

The concepts of structural properties and structuralism in the context of Quine and Putnam’s philosophy involve some nuanced distinctions. Here’s an overview:

1. Quine’s View:
2. . — Quine is known for his rejection of the analytic-synthetic distinction and his holistic view of scientific knowledge. He does not adhere to a strict form of structuralism in the sense that he doesn’t view mathematical or logical entities as purely structural.
3. . — Quine’s philosophy emphasizes the empirical basis of all knowledge, including mathematics. For Quine, the structure of scientific theories, including their logical and mathematical framework, is grounded in empirical content and is subject to revision based on sensory experience.

2. Putnam’s View:

. — Putnam, like Quine, rejected the analytic-synthetic distinction and emphasized the interdependence of empirical content and mathematical/logical structures.

. — However, Putnam did engage with structural realism, a form of structuralism in the philosophy of science that suggests the structure of scientific theories corresponds to the structure of the world.

. — Putnam proposed the “no miracles” argument, suggesting that the success of science can best be explained by the truth of its structural content. Thus, he flirted with the idea that structural properties (such as those described by scientific theories) might reflect real structures in the world.

In summary:

• Quine: Structural properties are not strictly structuralist in the traditional sense, as Quine emphasizes the empirical grounding and holistic nature of scientific theories, including their structural components.
• - Putnam: He leans more towards structural realism, suggesting that structural properties of scientific theories might indeed correspond to real structures in the world, thus aligning more closely with a structuralist viewpoint in certain contexts.

So, while Quine’s position is not typically considered structuralist, Putnam’s engagement with structural realism suggests a more structuralist interpretation of structural properties.