structure for 'Science'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

---

14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / b. Contrastive explanations

[using contrasting foil to home in on explanation]

4 ideas

16816	In 'contrastive' explanation there is a fact and a foil - why that fact, rather than this foil? [Lipton]
	Full Idea: In a 'contrastive' explanation what gets explained is not 'Why this?', but 'Why this rather than that?'. There is a fact and a foil, and one fact may have several foils. Why do leaves turn yellow in November rather than in January?
	From: Peter Lipton (Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd) [2004], 03 'Fact')
	A reaction: Lipton really likes this, and builds his story around it. Maybe, but it looks to me like an easier step towards a proper explanation. The foils are infinite. Why turn yellow rather than radioactive, insincere, divisible by three, or expensive?

16826	With too many causes, find a suitable 'foil' for contrast, and the field narrows right down [Lipton]
	Full Idea: The class of possible causes is often too big, …but if we are lucky or clever enough to find or produce a contrast where fact and foil have similar histories, most potential explanations are immediately 'cancelled out', and we have a research programme.
	From: Peter Lipton (Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd) [2004], 05 'A case')
	A reaction: He has a nice example of a triumph in 19th century German epidemiology. Once you get a good hypothesis, you can set up comparisons, based on a possible fact and a good foil. Genius is spotting hypothesis and foil. Nice.

6761	Contrastive explanations say why one thing happened but not another [Bird]
	Full Idea: A 'contrastive explanation' explains why one thing happened but not another.
	From: Alexander Bird (Philosophy of Science [1998], Ch.2)
	A reaction: If I explain why the ship sank, is this contrastive, or just causal, or both? Am I explaining why it sank rather than turned into a giraffe? An interesting concept, but I can't see myself making use of it.

17308	Explaining 'Adam ate the apple' depends on emphasis, and thus implies a contrast [Schaffer,J]
	Full Idea: Explaining why ADAM ate the apple is a different matter from explaining why he ATE the apple, and from why he ate THE APPLE. ...In my view the best explanations incorporate ....contrastive information.
	From: Jonathan Schaffer (Grounding, Transitivity and Contrastivity [2012], 4.3.1)
	A reaction: But why are the contrasts Eve, or throwing it, or a pear? It occurs to me that this is wrong! The contrast is with anything else which could have gone in subject, verb or object position. It is a matter of categories, not of contrasts.