ALCUNE NOTE SULLA NOZIONE DI SPIEGAZIONE NELLE SCIENZE E IN FILOSOFIA

G. Torrengo
{"title":"ALCUNE NOTE SULLA NOZIONE DI SPIEGAZIONE NELLE SCIENZE E IN FILOSOFIA","authors":"G. Torrengo","doi":"10.4081/INCONTRI.2019.468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When we explain something we use hypotheses, that is representations, which we formulate on the basis of some background theory or other. What makes such representations explanations are facts in the world. If, for instance, I can appeal to the hypothesis that the second referee has been unfair as a way of accounting for why Claudio is upset. and such a hypothesis is a (good) explanation if and only if the second referee has been unfair. It follows that even if scientific theories can always be read in an instrumentalist sense, in using them to formulate explanatory hypotheses we often appeal, implicitly or explicitly, to readings of them that go beyond their empirical content.","PeriodicalId":119535,"journal":{"name":"Istituto Lombardo - Accademia di Scienze e Lettere - Incontri di Studio","volume":"49 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Istituto Lombardo - Accademia di Scienze e Lettere - Incontri di Studio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/INCONTRI.2019.468","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When we explain something we use hypotheses, that is representations, which we formulate on the basis of some background theory or other. What makes such representations explanations are facts in the world. If, for instance, I can appeal to the hypothesis that the second referee has been unfair as a way of accounting for why Claudio is upset. and such a hypothesis is a (good) explanation if and only if the second referee has been unfair. It follows that even if scientific theories can always be read in an instrumentalist sense, in using them to formulate explanatory hypotheses we often appeal, implicitly or explicitly, to readings of them that go beyond their empirical content.
关于科学和哲学中解释的概念的一些说明
当我们解释某事时,我们使用假设,也就是表征,我们在一些背景理论或其他理论的基础上形成。使这种表述成为解释的是世界上的事实。例如,如果我可以用第二个裁判不公平的假设来解释克劳迪奥生气的原因。当且仅当第二个裁判不公平时,这样的假设是一个(好的)解释。由此可见,即使科学理论总是可以从工具主义的意义上解读,但在使用它们来制定解释性假设时,我们往往会或隐或明地要求对它们进行超越其经验内容的解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信