Four decades of scientific explanation

@inproceedings{Salmon1989FourDO,
  title={Four decades of scientific explanation},
  author={Wesley Salmon},
  year={1989}
}
As Aristotle stated, scientific explanation is based on deductive argument - yet, Wesley C. Salmon points out, not all deductive arguments are qualified explanations. The validity of the explanation must itself be examined. "Four Decades of Scientific Explanation" provides a comprehensive account of the developments in scientific explanation that transpired in the last four decades of the twentieth century. It continues to stand as the most comprehensive treatment of the writings on the subject… 

Tables from this paper

Explanation Explained

In recent years the received view on explanation seems to be coming to an end. The much coveted model of scientific explanation that seemed to spring from Hempel and Oppenheim’s original schema has

A Metaphysically Neutral Theory of Singular Scientific Explanation

Modern philosophical debate on explanation began with Hempel and Oppenheim's 1948 article: Studies in the Logic of Explanation . Hempel and Oppenheim's view: their Deductive-Nomological model of

Past and Contemporary Perspectives on Explanation

Peirce on Statistical Explanation The The Digital Encyclopedia of Peirce Studies

: Carl G. Hempel’s classical papers in 1942 and 1948 formulated in precise terms the deductive-nomological (D-N) model of scientific explanation. After brief hints in these articles, Hempel started

Scientific explanation and systematics

It is concluded that Hempel's (and Popper’s) model has little to offer in the way of positive guidelines for constructing successful explanations in cladistics.

Viewing-as explanations and ontic dependence

According to a widespread view in metaphysics and philosophy of science (the “Dependence Thesis”), all explanations involve relations of ontic dependence between the items appearing in the

Explanatory Generalizations, Part I: A Counterfactual Account

[Introduction] The nomothetic conception of explanation, according to which all successful explanations must appeal to laws, has dominated the discussion of scientific explanation in the second half

How to Study Scientific Explanation

This chapter investigates the working-method of three important philosophers of explanation discussed in Chap. 1: Carl Hempel, Philip Kitcher and Wesley Salmon. We argue that they do three things:

Scientific explanation: A critical survey

This paper describes the development of theories of scientific explanation since Hempel's earliest models in the 1940ies. It focuses on deductive and probabilistic whyexplanations and their main

History and the Sciences

The apparent power of the covering-law model of scientific explanation inspired efforts to make historical explanation fit within it. After the demise of that model, many philosophers of history have
...