Hi, thanks for responding. I know writing this article will incite many kinds of responses. The history of philosophy of science has shown this to be true.
I love you map analogy. And I think it helps to understand scientific anti-realism. You’re right. Antirealists think that science is that ‘map’. And you’re right, they think it corresponds to the world somewhat imperfectly. That’s why science changes the map.
So, anti-realism isn’t saying science is false or untrue. It’s saying that perhaps we can never find what we’re looking for with that ‘map’. Does that mean the map’s wrong? No. What we can say is that the map hasn’t been pointing to a real object. But along the way, it has helped us with many things.