Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ein logisch-pragmatisches modell von deduktiv-nomologischer erklärung (systematisierung)

  • Published:
Erkenntnis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present paper first shows that the validity of deductive-nomological (D-N) explanations (systematizations) depends in general on the interpretation context of the predicates involved in the explanation. Therefore, no logical-semantical model can be adequate. This problem is solved by relativisation of the validity criteria on both the confirmation context and the definition context of the premisses. Based upon this, a logical-pragmatical model of D-N explanation is developed. Thereby, especially explanations of laws and global explanations are taken into consideration, since these can be regarded as prototypes of scientific explanation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  1. repräsentieren die D-N-Erklärungsdebatte, geordnet nach Jahreszahl).

  2. Hempel, C. G. und Oppenheim, P.: 1948, ‘Studies in the Logic of Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 15, 135–175.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Eberle, R., Kaplan, D. und Montague, R.: 1961, ‘Hempel and Oppenheim on Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 28, 418–428.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kaplan, D.: 1961, ‘Explanation Revisited’, Philosophy of Science 28, 429–436.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kim, J.: 1963, ‘On the Logical Conditions of Deductive Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 30, 286–291.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ackermann, R.: 1965, ‘Deductive Scientific Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 32, 155–167.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ackermann, B. und Stenner, A.: 1966, ‘A Corrected Model of Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 33, 168–171.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Käsbauer, M.: 1969, Systematische Analysen, referiert in [36], S. 760–774.

  9. Morgan, C. G.: 1970, ‘Kim on Deductive Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 37, 434–439.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Omer, I. A.: 1970, ‘On the D-N-Model of Scientific Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 37, 417–433.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tuomela, R.: 1972, ‘Deductive Explanation of Scientific Laws’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 1, 369–392.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Morgan, C. G.: 1973, ‘Omer on Scientific Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 40, 110–117.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Morgan, C. G.: 1976, ‘Tuomela on Deductive Explanation’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 5, 511–525.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tuomela, R.: 1976, ‘Morgan on Deductive Explanation, A Rejoinder’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 5, 527–543.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gärdenfors, P.: 1976, ‘Relevance and Redundancy in Deductive Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 43, 420–432.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Käsbauer, M.: 1976, ‘Definitionen der wissenschaftlichen Erklärung’, Erkenntnis 10, 255–273.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Küttner, M.: 1976, ‘Ein verbesserter deduktiv-nomologischer Erklärungsbegriff’, Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 7, 274–297.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bromberger, S.: 1965, ‘An Approach to Explanation’, in: Butler, R. J. (ed.), Analytical Philosophy, Second Series, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, S. 72–105.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Carnap, R.: 1950, Logical Foundations of Probability, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Chisholm, R. M.: 1979, Erkenntnistheorie, dtv, München.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman, M.: 1974, ‘Explanation and Scientific Understanding’, Journal of Philosophy 71, 5–19.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Grünbaum, A.: 1976, ‘Ad Hoc Auxiliary Hypotheses and Falsificationism’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27, 329–362.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Haller, R.: 1974, ‘Über das sogenannte Münchhausentrilemma’, Ratio 16, 113–127.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Harman, G. H.: 1965, ‘The Inference to the Best Explanation’, Philosophical Review 74, 88–95.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hempel, C. G.: 1962, ‘Deductive-Nomological versus Statistical Explanation’, in: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. III, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, S. 98–169.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hempel, C. G.: 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation, The Free Press, New York-London.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hempel, C. G.: 1968, ‘Maximal Specifity and Lawlikeness in Probabilistic Explanation’, Philosophy of Science 35, 116–133.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hesse, M.: 1970, ‘Theories and the Transitivity of Conformation’, Philosophy of Science 37, 50–63.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hintikka, J.: 1968, ‘The Varieties of Information and Scientific Explanation’, in: Rootselaar, B.v. and Staal, J. F. (eds.), Proc. III. Intern. Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, S. 311–331.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Körner, S.: 1947, ‘On Entailment’, Proc. Ar. Soc. 21, 143–162.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kutschera, F. v.: 1972, Wissenschaftstheorie I, II, W. Fink, München.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lehrer, K.: 1975, ‘Induction, Rational Acceptance and Minimally Inconsistent Sets’, in: Maxwell, G. and AndersonJr. (eds.), Induction, Probability and Confirmation, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol. VI, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, S. 295–323.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lenk, H.: 1972, ‘Erklärung, Prognose, Planung, Rombach, Freiburg.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nagel, E.: 1961, The Structure of Science, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Niiniluoto, I. and Tuomela, R.: 1973, Theoretical Concepts and Hypothetico-Deductive Inference, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Popper, K.: 1976, Logik der Forschung, J. C. B. Mohr, Tübingen 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Stegmüller, W.: 1969, Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie, Bd.I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Stegmüller, W.: 1973, Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie, Bd. IV, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Stegmüller, W.: 1976, Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie, Bd. I, Kröner, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Suppes, P.: 1966, ‘Probabilistic Inference and the Concept of Total Evidence’, in: Hintikka, J. and Suppes, P. (eds.), Aspects of Inductive Logic, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, S. 49–65.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Tuomela, R.: 1980, ‘Explaining Explaining’, Erkenntnis 15, 211–243.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Woodward, J.: 1979, ‘Scientific Explanation’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30, 41–67.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Graz, Graz, Poland

    Gerhard Schurz

Authors
  1. Gerhard Schurz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Diese Arbeit basiert auf einer Dissertation. Prof. Haller, dem Dissertationsleiter, sowie Prof. Lehrer und Prof. Körner seien für viele Anregungen gedankt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schurz, G. Ein logisch-pragmatisches modell von deduktiv-nomologischer erklärung (systematisierung). Erkenntnis 17, 321–347 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182673

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182673

Search

Navigation