Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Purchasing is currently unavailable on Cambridge Core due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience and are working to restore services.

Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T12:38:44.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

24 - Explanatory Coherence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Paul Thagard
Edited by
Jonathan E. Adler  and
Lance J. Rips
Paul Thagard
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo
Jonathan E. Adler
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Lance J. Rips
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Why did the oxygen theory of combustion supersede the phlogiston theory? Why is Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection superior to creationism? How can a jury in a murder trial decide between conflicting views of what happened? This target article develops a theory of explanatory coherence that applies to the evaluation of competing hypotheses in cases such as these. The theory is implemented in a connectionist computer program with many interesting properties.

The problem of inference to explanatory hypotheses has a long history in philosophy and a much shorter one in psychology and artificial intelligence (AI). Scientists and philosophers have long considered the evaluation of theories on the basis of their explanatory power. In the late nineteenth century, Peirce discussed two forms of inference to explanatory hypotheses: hypothesis, which involved the acceptance of hypotheses, and abduction, which involved merely the initial formation of hypotheses (Peirce 1931–1958; Thagard 1988a). Researchers in artificial intelligence and some philosophers have used the term “abduction” to refer to both the formation and the evaluation of hypotheses. AI work on this kind of inference has concerned such diverse topics as medical diagnosis (Josephson et al. 1987; Pople 1977; Reggia et al. 1983) and natural language interpretation (Charniak and McDermott 1985; Hobbs et al. 1988). In philosophy, the acceptance of explanatory hypotheses is usually called inference to the best explanation (Harman 1973, 1986). In social psychology, attribution theory considers how people in everyday life form hypotheses to explain events (Fiske and Taylor 1984).

Type
Chapter
Information
Reasoning
Studies of Human Inference and its Foundations
 , pp. 471 - 513
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Achinsein, P. (1983) The nature of explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alcock, J. E. (1987) Parapsychology: Science of the anomalous or search for the soul?Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:553–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, A. & Belnap, N. (1975) Entailment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bartlett, F. (1958) Thinking: An experimental and social study. New York: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Bonjour, L. (1985) The structure of empirical knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, F. H. (1914) Essays on truth and reality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, B. & Shortliffe, E., eds. (1984) Rule-based expert systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Carey, S. (1985) Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1950) Logical foundations of probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carter, L. (1984) Reason in law. Little, Brown: London.Google Scholar
Charniak, E. & McDermott, D. (1985) Introduction to artificial intelligence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Clark, H. & Lucy, P. (1975) Understanding what is meant from what is said: A study in conversationally conveyed requests. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14:56–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, L. J. (1978) The coherence theory of truth. Philosophical Studies 34:351–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, R. (1983) A computational model for the analysis of arguments. Technical report CSRG-151. Department of Computer Science. University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1962) On the origin of species (text of sixth edition of 1872). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dejong, G. & Mooney, R. (1986) Explanation-based learning: An alternative view. Machine Learning 1:145–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duhem, P. (1954) The aim and structure of physical theory, trans. P. Wiener (first published 1914). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Einstein, A. (1952) On the electrodynamics of moving bodies. In: The principle of relativity, ed. Lorentz, H. A., Einstein, A., Minkowski, H. & Weyl, H.. Dover (originally published in 1905). Long Island, New York.Google Scholar
Falkenhainer, B. & Rajamoney, S. (1988) The interdependencies of theory formation, revision, and experimentation. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Machine Learning, ed. Laird, J.. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Feldman, J. & Ballard, D. (1982) Connectionist models and their properties. Cognitive Science 6:205–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. & Taylor, S. (1984) Social cognition. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. (1983) The modularity of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Foster, M. & Martin, , eds. (1966) Probability, confirmation, and simplicity. New York: Odyssey Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, A. (1987) An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning. Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Gibbs, H. (1984) Literal meaning and psychological theory. Cognitive Science 8:275–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. (1980) Theory and evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goel, A., Ramaiiujam, J., & Sadayappan, P. (1988) Towards a neural architecture for abductive reasoning. Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, vol. 1, San Diego.Google Scholar
Golding, M. (1984) Legal reasoning. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. (1986) Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grossberg, S., ed. (1988) Neural networks and natural intelligence. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hanen, M. (1987) Unpublished manuscript. University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Harman, G. (1973) Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Harman, G. (1986) Change in view: Principles of reasoning. Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Harman, C., Ranney, M., Salem, K., Doring, F., Epstein, J. & Jaworksa, A. (1988) A theory of simplicity. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hills Vale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hedges, L. (1987) How hard is hard science, how soft is soft science?American Psychologist 42: 443–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, C. (1967) The phenomenology of mind, trans. J. Baillie (first published 1807). New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. (1965) Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hendler, J. (1987) Marker-passing and microfeatures. Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial intelligence. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Hobbs, J., Stickel, M., Martin, P. & Edwards, D. (1988) Interpretation as abduction. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, J., Holyoak, K., Nisbett, H. & Thagard, P. (1986) Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. & Thagard, P. (1989) Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction, Cognitive Science 13:295–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, E. & Davis, K. (1965) From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 2, ed. Berkowitz, L.. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Josephson, J., Chandrasekaran, B., Smith, J. & Tanner, M. (1987) A mechanism for forming composite explanatory hypotheses. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 17:445–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1988) The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review 95:163–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirwan, R. (1789/1968) An essay on phlogiston and the constitution of acids (new impression of second English edition). London: Cass.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. (1981) Explanatory unification. Philosophy of Science 48:507–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970) Structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed., first published 1962). University of Chicago: Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1987) Motivation and inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of causal theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53:636–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1970) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In: Criticism and the growth of knowledge, ed. Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudan, L. (1976) Two dogmas of methodology. Philosophy of Science 43:585–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavoisier, A. (1862) Oeuvres (6 vols.). Paris: Imprimerie Imperiale.Google Scholar
Leake, D. (1988) Evaluating explanations. Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Burlington MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Lehnert, W. (1987) Case-based problem solving with a large knowledge base of learned cases. Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Burlington MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Lehrer, K. (1974) Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Levi, L. (1980) The enterprise of knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lycan, W. (1988) Judgment and justification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marr, D. (1982) Vision. San Francisco CA: Freeman.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T., Keller, R. & Kedar-Cabrelli, S. (1986) Explanation-based generalization: A unifying view. Machine Learning 1: 47–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbett, R. E. & Ross, L. (1980) Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Nowak, C. & Thagard, P. (1992) Copernicus, Newton, and explanatory coherence. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15:274–309.Google Scholar
O'Rorke, P., Aba, D. & Sage, S. (1988) A deductive-nomological model of abduction with learning. Unpublished manuscript. University of California at Irvine.Google Scholar
Pearl, J. (1986) Fusion, propagation, and structuring us belief networks. Artificial Intelligence 29:241–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearl, J. (1987) Distributed revision of composite beliefs. Artificial Intelligence 33:173–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958) Collected papers (8 vols.), ed. Hartshorne, C., Weiss, P. & Burks, A.. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Peng, Y. & Reggia, J. (1989) A connectionist model for diagnostic problem solving. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 19: 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennington, N. & Hastic, R. (1986) Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:242–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennington, N. & Hastic, R. (1987) Explanation-based decision making. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Perrin, C. (1988) The chemical revolution: Shifts in guiding assumptions. In: Scrutinizing science: Empirical studies of scientific change, ed. Donovan, A., Laudan, L. & Laudan, R.. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pople, H. (1977) The formation of composite hypotheses in diagnostic problem solving. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Burlington MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1959) The logic of scientific discovery. United Kingdom: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1961) From a logical point of view (2nd ed New York: Harper Torch-books.)Google Scholar
Rajamoney, S. & DeJong, C. (1988) Active explanation reduction: An approach to the multiple explanations problem. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Machine Learning, ed. Laird, J.. Burlington MA: Morgan Kanfmann.Google Scholar
Ranney, M. (1987) Changing naive conceptions of motion. Doctoral dissertation, Learning, Research, and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Ranney, M. & Thagard, P. (1988) Explanatory coherence and belief revision in naive physics. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Rao, K. R. & Palmer, J. (1987) The anomaly called psi: Recent research and criticism, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:539–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reggia, J., Nan, D. & Wang, P. (1983) Diagnostic expert systems based on a set covering modelInternational Journal of Man-Machine Studies 19:437–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescher, N. (1973) The coherence theory of truth. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. R. & the PDP Research Group (1986) Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, 2 vol Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1966) The foundations of scientific inference. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1970) Statistical explanation. In: The nature and function of scientific theories, ad. Colodny, R.. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1984) Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton Hills Vale, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schank, R. (1986) Explanation patterns. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Taubman, B. (1988) The preppy murder trial. St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1978) The best explanation: Criteria for theory choice. Journal of Philosophy 75:76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. (1986) Parallel computation and the mind-body problem. Cognitive Science 10:301–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. (1988a) Computational philosophy of science. Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1988b) The dinosaur debate: Application of a connectionist model of theory evaluation. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1989) Connectionism and epistemology: Goldman on winner-take-all networks. Philosophia 19: 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. (1990) The conceptual structure of the chemical revolution. Philosophy of Science 57: 183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P., Holyoak, K., Nelson, C. & Gochfeld, D. (1989) Analogical retrieval by constraint satisfaction. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. & Nowak, C. (1988) The explanatory coherence of continental drift. In: PSA 1988, vol. 1, ad. Fine, A. & Leplin, J.. Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. & Nowak, C. (1990) The conceptual structure of the geological revolution. In: Computational models of discovery and theory formation, ad. Shrager, J. & Langley, P.. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman, 27–72.Google Scholar
Trabasso, T., Sacco, T. & van dan Broek, P. (1984) Causal cohesion and story coherence. In: Learning and comprehension of texts, ed. Mandl, H., Stein, N. & Trabasso, T.. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum: 83–111.Google Scholar
Fraassen, B. (1980) The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wald, J., Farach, M., Tagamets, M. & Reggia, J. (1989) Generating plausible diagnostic hypotheses with self-processing causal networksJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1:91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×