more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 17324

[filed under theme 14. Science / D. Explanation / 1. Explanation / a. Explanation ]

Full Idea

'Because' can signal an inference rather than an explanation.

Gist of Idea

'Because' can signal an inference rather than an explanation

Source

David Liggins (Truth-makers and dependence [2012], 10.5)

Book Ref

'Metaphysical Grounding', ed/tr. Correia,F/Schnieder,B [CUP 2012], p.263


A Reaction

Aristotle starts from words like 'why?', but it can be a deceptive approach to explanation.


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]