首页> 外文期刊>Synthese >Mechanistic explanation at the limit
【24h】

Mechanistic explanation at the limit

机译:极限机械解释

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Resurgent interest in both mechanistic and counterfactual theories of explanation has led to a fair amount of discussion regarding the relative merits of these two approaches. James Woodward is currently the pre-eminent counterfactual theorist, and he criticizes the mechanists on the following grounds: Unless mechanists about explanation invoke counterfactuals, they cannot make sense of claims about causal interactions between mechanism parts or of causal explanations put forward absent knowledge of productive mechanisms. He claims that these shortfalls can be offset if mechanists will just borrow key tenets of his counterfactual theory of causal claims. What mechanists must bear in mind, however, is that by pursuing this course they risk both the assimilation of the mechanistic theories of explanation into Woodward’s own favored counterfactual theory, and they risk the marginalization of mechanistic explanations to a proper subset of all explanations. An outcome more favorable to mechanists might be had by pursuing an actualist-mechanist theory of the contents of causal claims. While it may not seem obvious at first blush that such an approach is workable, even in principle, recent empirical research into causal perception, causal belief, and mechanical reasoning provides some grounds for optimism.
机译:对机械和反事实的解释理论的兴致勃勃的兴趣引起了关于这两种方法相对优点的大量讨论。詹姆斯·伍德沃德(James Woodward)目前是杰出的反事实理论家,他基于以下理由对机械师提出批评:除非有关解释的机械师援引反事实,否则他们无法理解关于机制各部分之间因果相互作用的主张,也无法理解缺乏生产知识的因果解释。机制。他声称,如果机械师只是借用他的因果主张的反事实理论的关键原则,就可以弥补这些不足。然而,机械师必须牢记的是,通过这门课程,他们既可能冒险将解释的机械理论吸收到伍德沃德自己偏爱的反事实理论中,又会冒着将机械解释的边缘化到所有解释的适当子集的风险。追求因果要求内容的实在论者论可能会产生对机械师更有利的结果。尽管乍一看似乎并不明显,这种方法是可行的,但即使在原则上,最近对因果感知,因果信念和机械推理的实证研究也为乐观提供了一些依据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号