The Pragmatics of Explanation

Citation: Fraassen, B. C. V. The Pragmatics of Explanation. American Philosophical Quarterly 14(2): 143-150 (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): The Pragmatics of Explanation
Download: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20009661
Tagged:

Summary

In this article, the author deals with overall of scientific explanation such as meaning, history, models, major difficulties, limitations, and solution to improve. Scientific explanation is a relation or connection between theory (or hypothesis) and phenomena (or facts) and is the overriding virtue, in other words, the end of scientific inquiry. There are two common problems and Fraassen’s responses about them. First, when the explanation should be used and his response is that it is used when we have a theory. Second, why this method is a virtue and his saying is that people can explain the fact thanks to the theory.

There are two main types of models by Hempel and Salmon et al.. Hempel’s view contains two criteria, explanatory relevance and requirement of testability and his model suggest approach of inference with the methods D-N and I-S. Others’ approaches are quite different. They point out weakness of logical irrelevance of Hempel’s view showing some examples of mere consistency so they focus on statistical relevance but this point makes theory and scientific explanation nominal. However, as Salmon’s recognition, science could not explain individual facts. Also, there are some cases that the request for explanation is rejected and asymmetry revealed by the barometer (the problem of structure or category of each factor in a proposition).

He proposes the notion of why-question which is similar with Bromberger’s Why-P (presupposition of the question). However, while Brombeger’s why-P deals with simple causality (Why did John..?), why-question asks explanation of the phenomenon (Why did John rather than…?) and this why-question can be used in all kinds of cases.

The solution he suggests that limitations and difficulties the explanation has for example, reifying the explanadum, diluted properties, some logical problem can be improved by the Aristolelian sieve (as role of filter) which contains two parts, demonstration and explanation, and the logic of why-question.