more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 13054

[filed under theme 14. Science / A. Basis of Science / 4. Prediction ]

Full Idea

Various kinds of correlations exist that provide excellent bases for prediction, but because no suitable causal relations exist (or are known), these correlations do not furnish explanation.

Gist of Idea

Correlations can provide predictions, but only causes can give explanations

Source

Wesley Salmon (Four Decades of Scientific Explanation [1989], 2.3)

Book Ref

Salmon,Wesley C.: 'Four Decades of Scientific Explanation', ed/tr. Humphreys,Paul [Pittsburgh 2006], p.49


A Reaction

There may be problem cases for the claim that all explanations are causal, but I certainly think that this idea is essentially right. Prediction can come from induction, but inductions may be true and yet baffling.


The 20 ideas from 'Four Decades of Scientific Explanation'

It is knowing 'why' that gives scientific understanding, not knowing 'that' [Salmon]
Scientific explanation is not reducing the unfamiliar to the familiar [Salmon]
Explanation at the quantum level will probably be by entirely new mechanisms [Salmon]
We must distinguish true laws because they (unlike accidental generalizations) explain things [Salmon]
Deductive-nomological explanations will predict, and their predictions will explain [Salmon]
The 'inferential' conception is that all scientific explanations are arguments [Salmon]
A law is not enough for explanation - we need information about what makes a difference [Salmon]
Correlations can provide predictions, but only causes can give explanations [Salmon]
Good induction needs 'total evidence' - the absence at the time of any undermining evidence [Salmon]
Statistical explanation needs relevance, not high probability [Salmon]
Think of probabilities in terms of propensities rather than frequencies [Salmon]
Ontic explanations can be facts, or reports of facts [Salmon]
Why-questions can seek evidence as well as explanation [Salmon]
Can events whose probabilities are low be explained? [Salmon]
Flagpoles explain shadows, and not vice versa, because of temporal ordering [Salmon]
Does an item have a function the first time it occurs? [Salmon]
The three basic conceptions of scientific explanation are modal, epistemic, and ontic [Salmon]
Explanations reveal the mechanisms which produce the facts [Salmon]
For the instrumentalists there are no scientific explanations [Salmon]
Understanding is an extremely vague concept [Salmon]