more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 17321

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

Full Idea

'It is wrong because it produces pain for fun', and 'these constitute a table because they are arranged tablewise', and 'tea is poisonous because it contains arsenic' are clearly non-causal uses of 'because', and neither are they conceptual.

Gist of Idea

Value, constitution and realisation are non-causal dependences that explain

Source

David Liggins (Truth-makers and dependence [2012], 10.4)

Book Ref

'Metaphysical Grounding', ed/tr. Correia,F/Schnieder,B [CUP 2012], p.261


A Reaction

The general line seems to be that any form of determination will underwrite an explanation. He talks later of the 'wrongmaker' and 'poisonmaker' relationships to add to the 'truthmaker'. The table example is the 'object-maker' dependence relation.


The 34 ideas with the same theme [picking out different styles of explanation]:

Aristotelian explanations mainly divide things into natural kinds [Aristotle, by Politis]
Four Explanations: the essence and form; the matter; the source; and the end [Aristotle, by Politis]
Aristotle's four 'causes' are four items which figure in basic explanations of nature [Aristotle, by Annas]
There are as many causes/explanations as there are different types of why-question [Aristotle]
Science refers the question Why? to four causes/explanations: matter, form, source, purpose [Aristotle]
Aristotle's standard analysis of species and genus involves specifying things in terms of something more general [Aristotle, by Benardete,JA]
To the four causes Plato adds a fifth, the idea which guided the event [Seneca]
Nature is explained by mathematics and mechanism, but the laws rest on metaphysics [Leibniz]
The four explanations: objects by causes, concepts by ground, maths by spacetime, ethics by motive [Schopenhauer, by Lewis,PB]
Analytic explanation is wholes in terms of parts; synthetic is parts in terms of wholes or contexts [Belnap]
The 'inferential' conception is that all scientific explanations are arguments [Salmon]
Ontic explanations can be facts, or reports of facts [Salmon]
The three basic conceptions of scientific explanation are modal, epistemic, and ontic [Salmon]
An explanation is a table of statistical information [Salmon, by Strevens]
A good reason for something (the smoke) is not an explanation of it (the fire) [Armstrong]
An explanation is often a deduction, but that may well beg the question [Dummett]
Follow maths for necessary truths, and jurisprudence for contingent truths [Hacking]
Two main types of explanation are by causes, or by citing a theoretical framework [Cartwright,N]
Most explanations are just sentences, not arguments [Ruben]
Beneath every extrinsic explanation there is an intrinsic explanation [Field,H]
Is there metaphysical explanation (as well as causal), involving a constitutive form of determination? [Fine,K]
We explain by identity (what it is), or by truth (how things are) [Fine,K]
In addition to causal explanations, they can also be inferential, or definitional, or purposive [Le Poidevin]
Nomothetic explanations cite laws, and structural explanations cite mechanisms [Mumford]
Explanation is either showing predictability, or showing necessity, or showing causal relations [Psillos]
Explanations are causal, nomic, psychological, psychoanalytic, Darwinian or functional [Bird]
Evolutionary explanations look to the past or the group, not to the individual [Stout,R]
Value, constitution and realisation are non-causal dependences that explain [Liggins]
If explanations track dependence, then 'determinative' explanations seem to exist [Liggins]
Two things being identical (like water and H2O) is not an explanation [Audi,P]
There are 'conceptual' explanations, with their direction depending on complexity [Schnieder]
Explanations by disposition are more stable and reliable than those be external circumstances [Vetter]
Grounding is a kind of explanation, suited to metaphysics [Vetter]
Some explanations offer to explain a mystery by a greater mystery [Schulte]