Unification and explanation

Synthese 131 (1):145 - 154 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this article we criticize two recent articles that examinethe relation between explanation and unification. Halonen and Hintikka (1999), on the one hand,claim that no unification is explanation. Schurz (1999), on the other hand, claims that all explanationis unification. We give counterexamples to both claims. We propose a pluralistic approach to the problem:explanation sometimes consists in unification, but in other cases different kinds of explanation(e.g., causal explanation) are required; and none of these kinds is more fundamental.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,528

External links

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

Through your library


Added to PP

115 (#140,727)

6 months
10 (#133,273)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

The Unity of Science.Jordi Cat - 2013 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Can a reductionist be a pluralist?Daniel Steel - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):55-73.
Contextualism, explanation and the social sciences.Harold Kincaid - 2004 - Philosophical Explorations 7 (3):201 – 218.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Explanatory unification and the causal structure of the world.Philip Kitcher - 1989 - In Philip Kitcher & Wesley Salmon (eds.), Scientific Explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 410-505.
Explanation as unification.Gerhard Schurz - 1999 - Synthese 120 (1):95-114.

Add more references