more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
I am not resting my ontology on a simple 'argument to the best explanation'. ..What I want to say is that there are general demands on a kind of explanation, in particular, natural explanation, which require that there are persisting things.
Gist of Idea
Best explanations, especially natural ones, need grounding, notably by persistent objects
Source
Sally Haslanger (Persistence, Change and Explanation [1989], 5)
Book Ref
'Persistence: contemporary readings', ed/tr. Haslanger,S/|Kurtz,RM [MIT 2006], p.170
A Reaction
This is a really nice idea - that best explanation is not just about specific cases, but also about best foundations for explanations in general, which brings in our metaphysics. I defend the role of essences in these best explanations.
Related Ideas
Idea 13924 The persistence of objects seems to be needed if the past is to explain the present [Haslanger]
Idea 13925 Ontology disputes rest on more basic explanation disputes [Haslanger]
| 13925 | Ontology disputes rest on more basic explanation disputes [Haslanger] |
| 13924 | The persistence of objects seems to be needed if the past is to explain the present [Haslanger] |
| 13931 | By using aporiai as his start, Aristotle can defer to the wise, as well as to the many [Haslanger] |
| 13926 | Best explanations, especially natural ones, need grounding, notably by persistent objects [Haslanger] |
| 13927 | We must explain change amongst 'momentary entities', or else the world is inexplicable [Haslanger] |
| 13928 | If the things which exist prior to now are totally distinct, they need not have existed [Haslanger] |
| 13929 | Natural explanations give the causal interconnections [Haslanger] |
| 13930 | Persistence makes change and its products intelligible [Haslanger] |