more on this theme     |     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 12 ideas from David Liggins

We normally formalise 'There are Fs' with singular quantification and predication, but this may be wrong [Liggins]
We should always apply someone's theory of meaning to their own utterances [Liggins]
Nihilists needn't deny parts - they can just say that some of the xs are among the ys [Liggins]
Truthmakers for existence is fine; otherwise maybe restrict it to synthetic truths? [Liggins]
Either p is true or not-p is true, so something is true, so something exists [Liggins]
Necessities supervene on everything, but don't depend on everything [Liggins]
Value, constitution and realisation are non-causal dependences that explain [Liggins]
If explanations track dependence, then 'determinative' explanations seem to exist [Liggins]
'Because' can signal an inference rather than an explanation [Liggins]
Truth-maker theory can't cope with non-causal dependence [Liggins]
The dependence of {Socrates} on Socrates involves a set and a philosopher, not facts [Liggins]
Non-causal dependence is at present only dimly understood [Liggins]