more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Statistical relevance, not high probability, is the key desideratum in statistical explanation.
Gist of Idea
Statistical explanation needs relevance, not high probability
Source
Wesley Salmon (Four Decades of Scientific Explanation [1989], 2.5)
Book Ref
Salmon,Wesley C.: 'Four Decades of Scientific Explanation', ed/tr. Humphreys,Paul [Pittsburgh 2006], p.59
A Reaction
I suspect that this is because the explanation will not ultimately be probabilistic at all, but mechanical and causal. Hence the link is what counts, which is the relevance. He notes that relevance needs two values instead of one high value.
| 13056 | Statistical explanation needs relevance, not high probability [Salmon] |
| 13057 | Think of probabilities in terms of propensities rather than frequencies [Salmon] |
| 13060 | Can events whose probabilities are low be explained? [Salmon] |
| 16274 | If the well-ordering of a pack of cards was by shuffling, the explanation would make it more surprising [Lewis] |
| 16840 | To maximise probability, don't go beyond your data [Lipton] |
| 6756 | Probabilistic-statistical explanations don't entail the explanandum, but makes it more likely [Bird] |
| 6760 | An operation might reduce the probability of death, yet explain a death [Bird] |