more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Hempel proposes that explanations involve covering laws and antecedent conditions; this view (the 'covering law' view) has two versions, the deductive-nomological model and the probabilistic-statistical model of explanation.
Clarification
'Nomological' means concerning laws of nature
Gist of Idea
For Hempel, explanations are deductive-nomological or probabilistic-statistical
Source
report of Carl Hempel (Aspects of Scientific Explanation [1965]) by Alexander Bird - Philosophy of Science Ch.2
Book Ref
Bird,Alexander: 'Philosophy of Science' [UCL Press 2000], p.67
A Reaction
The obvious problem with this approach, it seem to me, is that the laws themselves need explanation, and I don't see how a law can be foundational unless there is a divine law-giver. Are the laws arbitrary and axiomatic?
22179 | Explanatory facts also predict, and predictive facts also explain [Hempel, by Okasha] |
6755 | For Hempel, explanations are deductive-nomological or probabilistic-statistical [Hempel, by Bird] |
17083 | The covering-law model is for scientific explanation; historical explanation is quite different [Hempel] |
13052 | Hempel rejects causation as part of explanation [Hempel, by Salmon] |