Hasok Chang is developing a new form of pragmatic scientific realism that aims to reorient the debate away from truth and towards practice. Central to his project is replacing truth as correspondence with his new notion of ‘operational coherence’, which is introduced as: 1) A success term with probative value to judge and guide epistemic activities. 2) A more useful alternative than truth as correspondence in guiding scientific practice. I argue that, given its current construal as neither necessary nor sufficient for success, operational coherence is too weak and fails to satisfy both 1) and 2). I offer a stronger construal of operational coherence which aims to improve on Chang’s account by tying it to systematic success. This makes operational coherence necessary and sufficient for (systematic) success. This new account, if successful, rescues 1) but not 2). I then take a step back and try to locate Chang’s pragmatic realism within the broader pragmatist tradition by comparing his views to the founding fathers Peirce, James and Dewey. I also assess to what extent we should consider Chang’s position ‘realist’, arguing that despite the many relativists threads running through it, Chang’s pragmatic realism is deserving of the realist label because its aims to maximize our learning from reality, even if it falls short of what many traditional realist are happy to accept as realism. I finish with comments on the epistemology of science pointing out that there is nothing intrinsic about a practice-based philosophy of science that precludes having both operational coherence and correspondence and highlighting that given a proper understanding these two notions could, in fact, be understood as complementary. I suggest one way this could be done.

Hasok Chang 正在开发一种务实的科学现实主义的新形式，旨在将辩论从真理转向实践。他的项目的核心是用他的新概念“操作连贯性”代替真理作为对应，该概念被引入为：1）具有判断和指导认识活动的证明价值的成功术语。2）在指导科学实践中，作为通信的比真理更有用的替代方案。我认为，鉴于其当前的解释既不是成功的必要条件，也不是成功的充分条件，操作连贯性太弱，无法同时满足 1) 和 2)。我提供了一个更强的操作连贯性解释，旨在通过将其与系统成功联系起来来改进 Chang 的帐户。这使得操作一致性对于（系统的）成功来说是必要和充分的。这个新帐户，如果成功，拯救 1) 但不是 2) 然后我退后一步，通过将张的观点与开国元勋皮尔斯、詹姆斯和杜威的观点进行比较，试图在更广泛的实用主义传统中找到张的实用现实主义。我还评估了我们应该在多大程度上考虑张的立场“现实主义”，认为尽管有许多相对主义的线索贯穿其中，但张的务实现实主义值得被贴上现实主义的标签，因为它的目标是最大限度地从现实中学习，即使它没有达到许多传统现实主义者乐于接受的现实主义。我以对科学认识论的评论结束，指出基于实践的科学哲学没有任何内在的东西会排除操作连贯性和对应性，并强调如果正确理解这两个概念实际上可以，可以理解为互补。我建议一种方法可以做到这一点。