ABSTRACT
After articulating the key claims of realists and anti-realists, I consider how considerations from general epistemology bear on the role of Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) in science and in arguments for realism and anti-realism. In particular I look at the internalism-externalism debate and the connections between scepticism about IBE and inductive scepticism. I also show that general considerations concerning the nature of evidence can undermine the underdetermination argument for anti-realism about observables. Reflecting on scepticism in general epistemology, I propose that we need to distinguish the ambitious realist who aims to prove certain realist claims (e.g. that our mature theories are mostly true) from the modest realist who aims only to refute general anti-realist arguments, such as the Pessimistic Meta-Induction.
