In Defense of Explanatory Ecumenism

Economics and Philosophy 8 (1):1-21 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many of the things that we try to explain, in both our common sense and our scientific engagement with the world, are capable of being explained more or less finely: that is, with greater or lesser attention to the detail of the producing mechanism. A natural assumption, pervasive if not always explicit, is that other things being equal, the more finegrained an explanation, the better. Thus, Jon Elster, who also thinks there are instrumental reasons for wanting a more fine-grained explanation, assumes that in any case the mere fact of getting nearer the detail of production makes such an explanation intrinsically superior: “a more detailed explanation is also an end in itself”. Michael Taylor agrees: “A good explanation should be, amongst other things, as fine-grained as possible.”

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,429

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Structural Explanation in Social Theory.Frank Jackson & Philip Pettit - 1992 - In K. Lennon & D. Charles (eds.), Reduction, Explanation, and Realism. Oxford University Press. pp. 97--131.
Supervenient Causation and Programme Explanation.Tamas Demeter - 2002 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 64 (1):83-93.
Explanatory Depth.Brad Weslake - 2010 - Philosophy of Science 77 (2):273-294.
Explanation and the Explanatory Gap.Elanor Taylor - 2016 - Acta Analytica 31 (1):77-88.
Moral Realism and Program Explanation.Mark T. Nelson - 2006 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (3):417 – 428.
Response-Dependence Without Tears.Frank Jackson & Philip Pettit - 2002 - Philosophical Issues 12 (1):97-117.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
174 (#71,568)

6 months
2 (#276,905)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?