Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:15:16.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pragmatic Aspects of Explanation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Theodore Mischel
Theodore Mischel*
Affiliation:
Colgate University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How can reasons explain actions? What is the force of “because” in “He did this because...” followed by a statement of the agent's intentions? The answer involves some concept of what can count as explanation, and the history of science indicates that the acceptability of explanations depends, in part, on a scientific community which has decided to pursue its inquiries in one direction rather than another. The first part of this paper examines this pragmatic aspect of explanations; the second part draws on this examination in the hope of elucidating the way reasons explain actions. The possibility of eliminating our ordinary, “purposive,” explanations of actions in favor of some “mechanistic,” neuro-physiological, account is then considered.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , March 1966 , pp. 40 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © 1966 by The Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Footnotes

∗∗

The research for this paper was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation through a post-doctoral Faculty Fellowship, 1964-1965. Parts of this paper were read at a Colloquium of the Department of the History of Science and Medicine, Yale University, March 1965.

References

[1] Agassi, J., “Towards an Historiography of Science.” History and Theory, Beiheft 2, 1963.Google Scholar
[2] Aronson, S., “The Gravitational Theory of George-Louis Le Sage.” The Natural Philosopher, vol. 3, 1964.Google Scholar
[3] Aristotle, Physics. Heinemann, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Boas, M., Boyle and 17th Century Chemistry, Cambridge University Press, 1958.Google Scholar
[5] Boas, M., “The Establishment of the Mechanical Philosophy.” Osiris, vol. X, 1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Clagett, M., The Science of Mechanics in the Middle Ages, University of Wisconsin Press, 1959.Google Scholar
[7] Cohen, I. B., Franklin and Newton. American Philosophical Society, 1956.Google Scholar
[8] Crombie, A. C., Augustine to Galileo. Mercury Books, London, 1961, vol. 1 & 2.Google Scholar
[9] Crombie, A. C., (edt.), Scientific Change. Basic Books, Inc., 1963.Google Scholar
[10] Davidson, D., “Actions, Reasons and Causes.” Symposium on Action of the American Philosophical Association, Eastern Division, 60th Meeting. Journal of Philosophy, vol. LX, no. 23, Nov. 7, 1963.Google Scholar
[11] Dray, W., Laws and Explanation in History. Oxford University Press, 1957.Google Scholar
[12] Duhem, P., The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Princeton University Press, 1954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Euler, L., Lettres A Une Princesse d'Allemagne. Paris, 1812.Google Scholar
[14] Feigl, H., “The 'Mental' and the 'Physical'.” Minnesotta Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol. II. University of Minnesotta Press, 1958.Google Scholar
[15] Feyerabend, P., “Explanation, Reduction and Empiricism.” Minnesotta Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol. III. University of Minnesotta Press, 1962.Google Scholar
[16] Frank, P., Modern Science and Its Philosophy. Collier Books, 1961.Google Scholar
[17] Hanson, N. R., Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge University Press, 1961.Google Scholar
[18] Hebb, D. O., The Organization of Behavior. Science Editions, New York, 1961.Google Scholar
[19] Hempel, C. G., “Explanations in Science and in History.” In R. G. Colodny, (edt.), Frontiers of Science and Philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press, 1962.Google Scholar
[20] Hesse, M. B., Forces and Fields. Philosophical Library, 1961.Google Scholar
[21] Huygens, , Discours de la Cause de la Pesanteur, added to the Traité de la Lumiere. Leiden, 1690.Google Scholar
[22] Jammer, M., Concepts of Force. Harper Torchbooks, 1962.Google Scholar
[23] Kelly, G. A., The Psychology of Personal Constructs, vol. 1, 2. Norton, 1955.Google Scholar
[24] Kuhn, T., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, vol. II, no. 2. University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
[25] Loemker, L. E., “Boyle and Leibnitz.” Journal of the History of Ideas, 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26] Maxwell, J. C., The Scientific Papers of J. C. Maxwell. Cambridge, 1890.Google Scholar
[27] Mischel, T., “Psychology and Explanations of Human Behavior.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. XXIII, no. 4, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[28] Mischel, T., “Personal Constructs, Rules and the Logic of Clinical Activity.” The Psychological Review, vol. 71, no. 3, 1964.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[29] Mouy, P., Le Dévelopment de la Physique Cartésienne. Paris, 1934.Google Scholar
[30] Newcomb, T. M., New Directions in Psychology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962.Google Scholar
[31] Newton, I., Principia. University of California Press, 1962, vol. 1 & 2.Google Scholar
[32] Newton, I., Opticks. Dover Publications, Inc., 1952.Google Scholar
[33] Peters, R. S., The Concept of Motivation. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958.Google Scholar
[34] Rawls, J., “Two Concepts of Rules.” Philosophical Review, 1955.10.2307/2182230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[35] Smart, J. J. C., Philosophy and Scientific Realism. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963.Google Scholar
[36] Taylor, W. B., Kinetic Theories of Gravitation. (From the Smithsonian Report for 1876). Washington, 1877.Google Scholar
[37] Toulmin, S., The Philosophy of Science. Hutchinson's University Library, 1953.Google Scholar