more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 17291

[filed under theme 14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / a. Types of explanation ]

Full Idea

I think it should be recognised that there are two fundamentally different types of explanation; one is of identity, or of what something is; and the other is of truth, or of how things are.

Gist of Idea

We explain by identity (what it is), or by truth (how things are)

Source

Kit Fine (Guide to Ground [2012], 1.11)

Book Ref

'Metaphysical Grounding', ed/tr. Correia,F/Schnieder,B [CUP 2012], p.79


The 21 ideas from 'Guide to Ground'

Is there metaphysical explanation (as well as causal), involving a constitutive form of determination? [Fine,K]
2+2=4 is necessary if it is snowing, but not true in virtue of the fact that it is snowing [Fine,K]
Each basic modality has its 'own' explanatory relation [Fine,K]
Even a three-dimensionalist might identify temporal parts, in their thinking [Fine,K]
If grounding is a relation it must be between entities of the same type, preferably between facts [Fine,K]
Ground is best understood as a sentence operator, rather than a relation between predicates [Fine,K]
Philosophical explanation is largely by ground (just as cause is used in science) [Fine,K]
We can only explain how a reduction is possible if we accept the concept of ground [Fine,K]
If you say one thing causes another, that leaves open that the 'other' has its own distinct reality [Fine,K]
Realist metaphysics concerns what is real; naive metaphysics concerns natures of things [Fine,K]
If mind supervenes on the physical, it may also explain the physical (and not vice versa) [Fine,K]
Truths need not always have their source in what exists [Fine,K]
If the truth-making relation is modal, then modal truths will be grounded in anything [Fine,K]
An immediate ground is the next lower level, which gives the concept of a hierarchy [Fine,K]
'Strict' ground moves down the explanations, but 'weak' ground can move sideways [Fine,K]
Logical consequence is verification by a possible world within a truth-set [Fine,K]
Facts, such as redness and roundness of a ball, can be 'fused' into one fact [Fine,K]
We explain by identity (what it is), or by truth (how things are) [Fine,K]
Every necessary truth is grounded in the nature of something [Fine,K]
Only metaphysical grounding must be explained by essence [Fine,K]
We learn grounding from what is grounded, not what does the grounding [Fine,K]