We Have Never Been Sophisticated

TL;DR

This paper challenges the idea that symmetry necessarily signals excess structure by reexamining the reduction versus sophistication distinction. It argues that for local field theories there is no principled separation between reduction and internal sophistication, and that multiple, context-dependent notions of reduction emerge instead. Through analyses spanning Maxwell electromagnetism, gauge formulations, symplectic reduction, and spacetime metaphysics, it shows that formal analogies do not justify a universal distinction and that pragmatic, context-sensitive aims should guide theory reformulation. The authors advocate retiring the strict distinction and focusing on representational clarity and explanatory utility in choosing among reformulations.

Abstract

Many philosophers of physics maintain that a physical theory that exhibits (certain kinds of) symmetries is flawed, on the grounds that such theories posit "excess structure". In an influential paper, Dewar [2019, "Sophistication about Symmetries", \emph{Brit. J. Phil. Sci.} \textbf{70}: 485-521] introduces a distinction between "reduction" and "sophistication" as alternative ways of removing excess structure. In this paper we re-examine the distinction as Dewar draws it, and we argue that there is no physically or philosophically important distinction between what Dewar calls "reduction" and what he calls "internal sophistication". We then argue that there are multiple notions of "reduction" in the literature that ought to be distinguished, both in motivation and in outcome.