70 likes | 84 Views
Scientific Explanation. Suppose we assume that explanation and prediction of phenomena are the goal/purpose of science Suppose we also assume that any account of explanation needs to incorporate logic and experience Hempel’s “D-N model” of explanation D: Deductive
E N D
Scientific Explanation • Suppose we assume that explanation and prediction of phenomena are the goal/purpose of science • Suppose we also assume that any account of explanation needs to incorporate logic and experience • Hempel’s “D-N model” of explanation • D: Deductive • N: Nomological (i.e., law like) • Hempel’s model is formal and deductive
Scientific Explanation E: An event to be explained: The water in my car radiator froze last night. How to explain this? • (Relatively) pure water freezes at 32 degrees. • My car radiator contains (relatively pure water) AND the temperature last night was below 32 degrees. ------------------------------------------------------------ Therefore, E: (the water in my car radiator froze)
Scientific Explanation E: An event to be explained: The water in my car radiator froze last night. How to explain this? Hempel’s model • L1, L2 … LN • C1, C2 … CN -------------------- E If some phenomenon, E, can be subsumed under law-like generalizations and initial conditions (i.e., derived from the) that that phenomenon is explained.
Scientific Prediction E: An event predicted: The water in my car radiator will freeze last night. Hempel’s model • (Relatively) pure water freezesat 32 degrees (L) • My car radiator contains relatively free water and the temperature tonight will go below less than 32 degrees (C1 and C2). -------------------------------------------------------------------- So, the water is my car radiator will freeze tonight (E).
Scientific Explanations and Predictions • Challenges to Hempel’s model of explanation: • What about sciences (such as many fields in biology) that do not have law-like statements? Are they not able to offer explanations? • Hempel: Some sciences include probabilistic generalizations from which probable explanations and/or predictions do follow. • The problem of asymmetry: examples in which while two statements can be derived from each other, only one way of construing their relationships is reasonably causal.
Scientific Explanations and Predictions • Challenges to Hempel’s model of explanation: • The problem of asymmetry: examples in which while two statements can be derived from each other, only one way of construing their relationships is reasonably causal. • E: A flagpole casts a particular shadow. • C’s: The height of the flagpole and the angle of the sun relative to the flagpole. • Which explains which? • It appears that statements of the form C explains E, but not vice versa.
van Fraassen’s account of Scientific Explanations • Explanation is not a formal relationship (defined in terms of logic) • It is a pragmatic relationship – context and practice dependent: • “Why” questions are asked, and regarded as answered, within specific contests • To understand them (and just what will count as an explanation) requires knowledge of the scientific context within which they are asked. • Example: Why sex?