Specifically, I'm very curious about whether any attempts have been made to quantify the probability that our scientific theories are, in some sense, "approaching the truth". I've read a bunch of articles and watched several videos about the arguments for and against scientific realism and antirealism and the antirealist arguments.
The no miracles argument strikes me as the most persuasive of the realist arguments, and yet, I've never seen any attempts to actually formalize it -- to come up with some sort of reasonable prior and posterior probability distributions. And without any attempt to quantify things, the argument seems pretty weak to the counterargument that there could easily be many theories, even infinitely many, that describe the evidence equally well and we have no way of noing which one is correct. But it's not like this argument has just generally been discarded by all/most philosophers of science, so I figure there probably has been work done on it, even though I can't seem to find it by Googling. Has there? If so, where can I read about it?
