Advertisement

The Why and How of Explanation: An Analytical Exposition

Chapter
  • 280 Downloads
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 302)

Abstract

Heinrich Hertz and Steven Weinberg — two illustrious physicists separated by a century — exemplify by their respective views of physics one of the crucial transitions in philosophy that this century of science has undergone. We are concerned here with the role assigned to theories, their constituting laws and consequently the criteria by which they are supposed to be compared and evaluated. Should a theory enable us to be solely “in advance of the facts,” as Hertz had stipulated [Hertz (1894) 1956], p.1, or should it aim at what seems to be a rather loftier objective: increasing our understanding of “why… [the world] is the way it is,” as Weinberg demanded [Weinberg (1992) 1994], p.219? The tension is then between on the one hand successful prediction based on appropriate representation of phenomena and on the other hand explanatory power grounded in schemes of explanation.

Keywords

Logical Structure Scientific Explanation Photoelectric Effect Intrinsic Good Instrumental Good 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Allen et àl. 1998]
    Allen, C., Bekoff, M. and Lauder, G. (eds.), (1998). Nature’s Purpose: Analyses of Function and Design in Biology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: the MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. [Baird et àl. 1997]
    Baird, D., Hughes, R. I. G. and Nordmann, A. (eds.), (1997). Heinrich Hertz: Classical Physicist, Modern Philosopher. Dordrecht, Boston, London, Boston: Studies Series V. 198, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. [Brandon 1998]
    Brandon, R. N., (1998). “Biological Teleology: Questions and Explanations,” in [Allen et àl. 1998], pp.79–97.Google Scholar
  4. [Carnap 1966]
    Carnap, R., (1966). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Gardner, M. (ed.), New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. [Glymour 1984]
    Glymour, C., (1984). “Explanation and Realism,” in [Leplin 1984], pp.173–192.Google Scholar
  6. [Hacking 1983]
    Hacking, I., (1983). Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. [Hempel 1965]
    Hempel, C. G., (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: the Free Press.Google Scholar
  8. [Hempel and Oppenheim (1948) 1965]
    Hempel, C. G. and Oppenheim, P., ([1948] 1965). “Studies in the Logic of Explanation,” in [Hempel 1965], pp.245–95.Google Scholar
  9. [Hertz (1894) 1956]
    Hertz, H., ([1894] 1956). The Principles of Mechanics Presented in a New Form. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  10. [Hon 1997]
    Hon, G., (1997). “Hertz’s Study of Propagation vs. Rutherford’s Study of Structure: Two Modes of Experimentation and Their Theoretical Underpinnings,” in [Baird et àl. 1997], pp.59–72.Google Scholar
  11. [Hon 2000]
    Hon, G., (2000). “The Limits of Experimental Method: Experimenting on an Entangled System — The Case of Biophysics,” in Carrier, M., Massey, G. J. and Reutsche, L. (eds.). Science at Century’s End: Philosophical Questions on the Progress and Limits of Science. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, pp.284–307.Google Scholar
  12. [Houston 1994]
    Houston, J., (1994). Reported Miracles, A Critique of Hume. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [Hume (1748) 1993]
    Hume, D., ([1748] 1993). “Of Miracles,” in his An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, section X.Google Scholar
  14. [Humphreys 1968]
    Humphreys, W. C., (1968). Anomalies and Scientific Theories. San Francisco: Freemann, Cooper and Co.Google Scholar
  15. [Kitcher 1989]
    Kitcher, P., (1989). “Explanatory Unification and the Causal Structure of the World,” in [Kitcher and Salmon 1989], pp.410–505.Google Scholar
  16. [Kitcher 1993]
    Kitcher, P., (1993). The Advancement of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. [Kitcher and Salmon 1989]
    Kitcher, P., and Salmon, W. C. (eds.). (1989). Scientific Explanation. vol. 13, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  18. [Kuhn 1977]
    Kuhn, T., (1977). “Concepts of Cause in the Development of Physics,” in his The Essential Tension. Chicago, London: Chicago University Press, pp.21–30.Google Scholar
  19. [Leplin 1984]
    Leplin, J., (ed.). (1984). Scientific Realism. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  20. [Lipton 1992]
    Lipton, P., (1992). “The Seductive-Nomological Model,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 23: 691–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [Mach 1974]
    Mach, E., (1974). The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and Historical Account of Its Development. McCormack, T. J. (tr.), La Salle, Illinois: Open Court.Google Scholar
  22. [McMullin 1984]
    McMullin, E., (1984). “The ideals of explanation in natural science,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 9: 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [Millikan 1916]
    Millikan, R. A., (1916). “A Direct Photoelectric Determination of Planck’s ‘h’,”Physical Review, 7: 355–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [Millikan 1922]
    Millikan, R. A., (1922). The Electron. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (7th impres.).Google Scholar
  25. [Nagel (1961) 1979]
    Nagel, E., ([1961] 1979). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  26. [Newton (1687) 1995]
    Newton, I., ([1687] 1995). Principia. Motte, A. (tr.), Amherst, New York, Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  27. [Nobel Lectures 1965]
    Nobel Lectures, (1965). Physics 1922–1941. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  28. [Nobel Lectures 1967]
    Nobel Lectures, (1967). Physics 1901–1921. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  29. [Pais 1983]
    Pais, A., (1983). “Subtle is the Lord…” The Science and Life of Albert Einstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. [Redhead 1990]
    Redhead, M., (1990). “Explanation in Physics,” in D. Knowles (ed.). Explanation and its Limits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.135–154.Google Scholar
  31. [Salmon 1984]
    Salmon, W. C., (1984). Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. [Salmon 1990]
    Salmon, W. C., (1990). Four Decades of Scientific Explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  33. [Salmon 1998]
    Salmon, W. C., (1998). Causality and Explanation. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [Scheffler 1957]
    Scheffller, I., (1957). “Explanation, Prediction, and Abstraction,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 7: pp.293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [Schrödinger (1954) 1984]
    Schrödinger, E., ([1954] 1984). “The Philosophy of Experiment,” in his Collected Papers, Volume 4: General Scientific and Popular Papers. Wien: The Austrian Academy of Sciences, pp.558–568.Google Scholar
  36. [Stachel 1998]
    Stachel, J., (ed.) (1998). Einstein’s Miraculous Year. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. [Stuewer 1970]
    Stuewer, R. H., (1970). “Non-Einsteinian Interpretations of the Photoelectric Effect,” in R. H. Stuewer (ed.). Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. V. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp.246–263.Google Scholar
  38. [van Fraassen (1980) 1990]
    van Fraassen, B., ([1980] 1990). The Scientific Image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. [van Fraassen 1989]
    van Fraassen, B., (1989). Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [von Wright 1971]
    von Wright, G. H., (1971). Explanation and Understanding. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  41. [Weinberg (1992) 1994]
    Weinberg, S., ([1992] 1994). Dreams of A Final Theory. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  42. [Wittgenstein (1921) 1978]
    Wittgenstein, L., ([1921] 1978). Tractatus Logico Philosopicus. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations