Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy of Science 28 (4):418-428 (1961)
|Abstract||Hempel and Oppenheim, in their paper 'The Logic of Explanation', have offered an analysis of the notion of scientific explanation. The present paper advances considerations in the light of which their analysis seems inadequate. In particular, several theorems are proved with roughly the following content: between almost any theory and almost any singular sentence, certain relations of explainability hold|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
James Woodward (1979). Scientific Explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (1):41-67.
Joseph C. Pitt (ed.) (1988). Theories of Explanation. Oxford University Press.
Brian Cupples (1977). Three Types of Explanation. Philosophy of Science 44 (3):387-408.
Carl G. Hempel & Paul Oppenheim (1948). Studies in the Logic of Explanation. Philosophy of Science 15 (2):135-175.
Wesley C. Salmon (1974). Comments on 'Hempel's Ambiguity' by J. Alberto Coffa. Synthese 28 (2):165 - 169.
Robert C. Cummins (2000). "How Does It Work" Versus "What Are the Laws?": Two Conceptions of Psychological Explanation. In F. Keil & Robert A. Wilson (eds.), Explanation and Cognition, 117-145. MIT Press.
Maria Rentetzi (2005). The Metaphorical Conception of Scientific Explanation: Rereading Mary Hesse. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (2):377 - 391.
Karl-Dieter Opp (2005). Explanations by Mechanisms in the Social Sciences. Problems, Advantages and Alternatives. Mind and Society 4 (2):163-178.
David Kaplan (1961). Explanation Revisited. Philosophy of Science 28 (4):429-436.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #58,054 of 751,156 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #62,995 of 751,156 )
How can I increase my downloads?