____________________________________________
“Why General Relativity Does Need an Interpretation.” Philosophy of Science 63 (1996) S80-S88.
Abstract. There is a widespread impression that General Relativity, unlike Quantum Mechanics, is in no need of an interpretation. I present two reasons for thinking that this is a mistake. The first is the familiar hole argument. I argue that certain skeptical responses to this argument are too hasty in dismissing it irrelevant to the interpretative enterprise. My second reason is that interpretative questions about General Relativity appear to be central to the search for a quantum theory of gravity. I illustrate this claim by examining the interpretative consequences of a popular technical move in canonical quantum gravity.
_____________________________________________