David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ever since Hempel and Oppenheim's development of the Deductive Nomological model of scientific explanation in 1948, a great deal of philosophical energy has been dedicated to constructing a viable model of explanation that concurs both with our intuitions and with the general project of science. Here I critically examine the developments in this field of study over the last half century, and conclude that Humphreys' aleatory model is superior to its competitors. There are, however, some problems with Humphreys' account of the relative quality of an explanation, so in the end I develop and defend a modified version of the aleatory account
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
James Woodward (1979). Scientific Explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (1):41-67.
Stuart Gluck & Steven Gimbel (1997). An Intervening Cause Counterexample to Railton's DNP Model of Explanation. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):692-697.
Peter Railton (1978). A Deductive-Nomological Model of Probabilistic Explanation. Philosophy of Science 45 (2):206-226.
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.
I. A. Omer (1970). On the D-N Model of Scientific Explanation. Philosophy of Science 37 (3):417-433.
Torsten Wilholt (2005). Explaining Models: Theoretical and Phenomenological Models and Their Role for the First Explanation of the Hydrogen Spectrum. [REVIEW] Foundations of Chemistry 7 (2):149-169.
Ingo Brigandt (2013). Explanation in Biology: Reduction, Pluralism, and Explanatory Aims. Science and Education 22 (1):69-91.
Wesley C. Salmon (1974). Comments on 'Hempel's Ambiguity' by J. Alberto Coffa. Synthese 28 (2):165 - 169.
Henk W. de Regt (2006). Wesley Salmon's Complementarity Thesis: Causalism and Unificationism Reconciled? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (2):129 – 147.
Igor Hanzel (2008). Idealizations and Concretizations in Laws and Explanations in Physics. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 39 (2):273 - 301.
Maria Rentetzi (2005). The Metaphorical Conception of Scientific Explanation: Rereading Mary Hesse. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (2):377 - 391.
Gerhard Schurz (1995). Scientific Explanation: A Critical Survey. [REVIEW] Foundations of Science 1 (3):429-465.
Added to index2011-03-08
Total downloads8 ( #182,051 of 1,140,038 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #157,514 of 1,140,038 )
How can I increase my downloads?