![]() See his Foundations of Historical Knowledge, New York: Harper (.)ĦThe statements in this explanation, this deductive argument, must be empirically warranted and this necessity expresses Hempel’s empiricism. A scientific law thus expresses a regularity which occurs in the world, and an event is “covered” by that law in so far as its occurrence can be deduced from that law and from statements which assert the occurrence of the “causes.”ĥMinimally, then, an explanation of E has to have the following form: , C n - have caused the event to be explained, amounts to the statement that, according to certain general laws, a set of events of the kinds mentioned is regularly accompanied by an event of kind E.” 4 There is, he makes clear, 5 no difference between displaying the cause of some event and showing that universal scientific laws cover that event. There are theories of causation different from Hempel (.)ĤHempel claims that the explanation of an event of some specific kind E consists in indicating its causes, and, further, that “the assertion that a set of events - say, of the kinds C 1, C 2. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |