Some Remarks on the Logic of Explanation in the Social Sciences

Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 4:64-81 (1970)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

If one were to write a history of the philosophy of science in the spirit of T. S. Kuhn, one would have to consider the model of scientific explanation which Popper proposed and Hempel and Oppenheim developed to be one of the great paradigms of contemporary analytical philosophy of science. This analogue to the historically important paradigms of the individual sciences seems to me to be justifiable for the following reasons: first, the Hempel—Oppenheim model claims universal methodological validity; second, discussions on the problem of explanation have centred on this model for some time; third, the recent cognitive progress in this field has been largely the result of the interrelation between criticism of this model on the one hand and its improvement and explication on the other hand; and lastly, this model stands for a particular comprehension of the problems and possibilities of science, a concept of quite important practical consequence.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

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

Some Remarks on the Logic of Explanation in the Social Sciences.Albrecht Wellmer - 1970 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures 4:64-81.
Hempelove kritériá explanácie V kontexte modelu historickej explanácie.Lukáš Bielik - 2007 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 14 (4):498-517.
Explanation revisited.David Kaplan - 1961 - Philosophy of Science 28 (4):429-436.
Do statistical laws have explanatory efficacy?Samuel E. Gluck - 1955 - Philosophy of Science 22 (1):34-38.
Covering law explanation.Thomas Nickles - 1971 - Philosophy of Science 38 (4):542-561.
Scientific explanation.James Woodward - 1979 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (1):41-67.
Four Decades of Scientific Explanation.Wesley C. Salmon & Anne Fagot-Largeault - 1989 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 16 (2):355.
Three types of explanation.Brian Cupples - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (3):387-408.
Hempel and Oppenheim on explanation.Rolf Eberle, David Kaplan & Richard Montague - 1961 - Philosophy of Science 28 (4):418-428.
Theories of explanation.Joseph C. Pitt (ed.) - 1988 - New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-21

Downloads
10 (#1,189,467)

6 months
3 (#965,065)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Idea of a Social Science.Peter Winch - 1959 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 14 (2):247-248.
Laws and Explanations in History.W. H. Dray - 1957 - Philosophy 34 (129):170-172.
Readings in the Philosophy of Sci-ence.Herbert Feigl & May Brodbeck - 1953 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 7 (26):175-175.
Technik und Wissenschaft als 'Ideologie'.Jürgen Habermas - 1972 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 26 (3):469-470.

View all 7 references / Add more references