The article discusses the debate between scientific realism and anti-realism, focusing on the no-miracles argument and the pessimistic meta-induction. It suggests that while the no-miracles argument supports the idea that scientific theories reflect reality, the pessimistic meta-induction argues that not all scientific ideas are ultimately true. The author explores the concept of realism as understanding unseen aspects of the world beyond human perception. The article also touches on structural realism as a response to this debate. Overall, the research suggests that further investigation is needed to fully understand this controversy.