Most practitioners of the metaphysics of science agree that it should be a naturalized metaphysics. But, just as in other areas of philosophy, there is no consensus on what constitutes naturalism. Here I will focus on just one aspect, viz., the idea that the metaphysics of science should be epistemically naturalized. In the first section I will characterize the kind of epistemic naturalism relevant to the metaphysics of science. The main idea, drawing on the work of Penelope Maddy, is that metaphysical inquiry is to be conducted and metaphysical claims justified in the very same way that scientific inquiry is conducted and scientific claims are justified. I then examine two prominent examples of metaphysicians of science proposing to “naturalize” the metaphysics of science, and argue that they fail to be epistemically natural. These are approaches due to James Ladyman and Don Ross, and to Anjan Chakravartty. Considering their failures shows us a way forward for naturalized metaphysics of science that is both more metaphysical and more scientific.

大多数科学形而上学的实践者都同意它应该是一种自然化的形而上学。但是，就像在哲学的其他领域一样，对于自然主义的构成并没有达成共识。在这里，我将只关注一个方面，即科学的形而上学应该在认识论上自然化的想法. 在第一部分中，我将描述与科学形而上学相关的认知自然主义类型。借鉴佩内洛普·马迪 (Penelope Maddy) 工作的主要思想是，形而上学探究和形而上学主张的正当性与进行科学探究和科学主张正当性的方式完全相同。然后，我考察了两个突出的科学形而上学家的例子，他们提议将科学的形而上学“自然化”，并认为它们在认识论上是不自然的。这些方法归功于 James Ladyman 和 Don Ross，以及 Anjan Chakravartty。考虑到他们的失败，向我们展示了一条更形而上学和更科学的自然化形而上学的前进之路。