<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-06-08T08:50:59Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/133025" metadataPrefix="marc">https://docta.ucm.es/rest/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/133025</identifier><datestamp>2026-02-25T00:52:33Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_20.500.14352_14</setSpec><setSpec>col_20.500.14352_15</setSpec></header><metadata><record xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
   <leader>00925njm 22002777a 4500</leader>
   <datafield ind2=" " ind1=" " tag="042">
      <subfield code="a">dc</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind2=" " ind1=" " tag="720">
      <subfield code="a">Martín Villuendas, Mariano</subfield>
      <subfield code="e">author</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind2=" " ind1=" " tag="260">
      <subfield code="c">2025</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind2=" " ind1=" " tag="520">
      <subfield code="a">Scientific understanding constitutes one of the most firmly settled topics in the philosophy of general science. The most accepted approach within the debate has been the so-called “factivism of understanding.” Here, I show analytically how the latter is articulated through the acceptance of two interrelated theses: an epistemological—veritism—and an ontological one—realism. Recently, a group of authors challenged this line of thought by dissociating ontological and epistemological commitments. I examine these proposals, elucidating to what extent they fail in their attempt to formulate a consistent account of scientific understanding. I argue that if one wants to articulate an account committed to a truth-centered epistemology, one should adopt a realist stance; if one wants to formulate a realist account of scientific understanding, one should subscribe to a truth-centered epistemology.</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">Martín-Villuendas, M. Scientific Understanding: No Veritism Without Realism, No Realism Without Veritism. Acta Anal (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-025-00643-5</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">0353-5150</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/133025</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">1874-6349</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-025-00643-5</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12136-025-00643-5</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind1="8" ind2=" " tag="024">
      <subfield code="a">https://produccioncientifica.ucm.es/documentos/698ae3869e41074a91302dc1</subfield>
   </datafield>
   <datafield ind2="0" ind1="0" tag="245">
      <subfield code="a">Scientific understanding: no veritism without realism, no realism without veritism</subfield>
   </datafield>
</record></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>