Titlebook: Rethinking Explanation; JOHANNES PERSSON,PETRI YLIKOSKI Book 2007 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007 knowledge.philosophy of scienc

尊重

WHAT TO ASK OF AN EXPLANATION-THEORYs to which particular theory that is the correct one, I will argue for and against different alternatives in ways of addressing these issues. Partly, what I will try to do is start listing some of the issues over which we, as philosophers in the theory of explanation, should make up our minds. In so

神經(jīng)

THE IDEA OF CONTRASTIVE EXPLANANDUMuments have a broader application. They are relevant also to other kinds of explanations. In the first section I will first present the intuitive idea of contrastive questions, and then elaborate it by discussing typical criteria for the choice of a contrast. I also suggest a novel way to see the di

HEAVY

讓空氣進(jìn)入

CAUSAL EXPLANATION PROVIDES KNOWLEDGE WHYo hold independently of how its relata are described: the relation is extensional, and its relata are normally taken to be events. The explanatory relation is, however, intensional. This means that we cannot replace a term with co-referring or coextensional terms within an explanatory context withou

原始

CAUSAL EXPLANATION AND MANIPULATIONeffect in virtue of which citing the cause explains the effect. In particular, it requires a specification of what it is for the . to be causally dependent on the . and what types of things (broadly understood) the . are.

Conduit

ASSESSING THE EXPLANATORY POWER OF CAUSAL EXPLANATIONSained, and descriptions of the causal processes that link these interactions to one another and to the explanandum event. In his view, a causal explanation is a description of a causal net in which causal interactions are the nodes and causal processes constitute the links between the nodes. The exp

宴會(huì)

HUMP

morale

IBE AND EBIthe standard view of the relation between inference and explanation. We tend to think that first we infer then we scan our pool of inferences for suitable explanations. But as Peter Lipton (2004, Chapter 4) convincingly argues, and as we all suspected from detective stories, this view seriously unde

GUILT

EXPLAINING WITH EQUILIBRIA68ption of economic (and sometimes biological) explanatory models. For example, economist Edward Lazear has recently (2000) claimed that the adherence to equilibrium concepts is a major factor contributing to the ‘scientific’ status of economics.