Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T08:10:03.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Logic of Why-Questions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Matti Sintonen
Matti Sintonen*
Affiliation:
The Finnish Academy and University of Helsinki
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their classic work on the logic of explanation Hempel and Oppenheim (1948) claim that to explain the phenomena in the world of our experience is to answer the question “why?”, rather than the question “what?”. But there is a source of embarrassment, viz., the underdeveloped logic of why-questions itself. In this paper I want to explore some recent advances which, I shall argue, help us to overcome some of the embarrassment.

One way in which the logic of questions could help is proposed by Jaakko Hintikka. According to Hintikka (1981a) we can look upon scientific inquiry as a series of questions put to nature. For instance a scientist who tests a theory first derives its consequences C1,...,Cn and then asks nature questions of the form “Is CQ true?”. The inquirer (querier) here attempts to induce from nature one of the conclusive answers “Co is true” or “Co is not true”.

Type
Part VI. Issues in the Logic of Science
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1984 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1984 , 1984 , pp. 168 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1984

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.)

References

Achinstein, Peter. (1977). “What is an Explanation?”. American Philosophical Quarterly 14: 1-14.Google Scholar
Achinstein, Peter. (1981). “Can There Be a Model of Explanation?” Theory and Decision 13: 201-227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aqvist, Lennart. (1965). A New Approach to the Logical Theory of Interrogatives. Uppsala: Filosofiska Foreningen.Google Scholar
Belnap, Nuel D. and Steel, Thomas B. (1976). The Logic of Questions and Answers. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Eberle, R., Kaplan, D., and Montague, R. (1961). “Hempel and Oppenheim on Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 28: 418-428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, Peter. (1980). “A Pragmatic Approach to Explanations.” Philosophy of Science 47: 405-423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girill, R. T. (1977). “Explanatory Pragmatics: A Critical Analysis.” Philosophy Research Archives III: 1-50.Google Scholar
Hanna, Joseph. (1979). “An Interpretative Survey of Recent Research on Scientific Explanation.” In Current Research in Philosophy o£ Science. Edited by Asquith, P. D. and Kyburg, H. E. Jr. East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 291-361.Google Scholar
Hansson, Bengt. (1974). “Explanations - Of What?” Stanford University. (Mimeographed).Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. and Oppenheim, Paul. (1948). “Studies in the Logic of Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 15: 135-175. (As reprinted in Hempel (1965). Pages 245-290.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1964). “Postscript (1964) to Studies in the Logic of Explanation.” In Hempel (1965). Pages 291-295.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko. (1976). The Semantics of Questions and the Questions of Semantics (Acta Philosophica Fennica, Volume 28, Number 4.) Helsinki: Societas Philosophica Fennica.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko. (1981a). “On the Logic of an Interrogative Model of Scientific Inquiry.” Synthese 47: 69-83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko. (1981b). “The Logic of Information-Seeking Dialogues: A Model.” In Konzepte der Dialektik. Edited by W. Becker and K. Essler. Frankfurt-am-Main: Vittorio Klostermann. Pages 212-231.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon. (1963). “On the Logical Conditions of Deductive Explana176 tion.” Philosophy of Science 30: 286-291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stegmüller, Wolfgang. (1983). Erklarung, Begrundung, Kausalität. (Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschafstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie, Band I. 2. verbesserte und erweiterte Auflage.) Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Thorpe, D.A. (1971*). “The Quartercentenary Model of D-N Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 41: 188-195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuomela, Raimo. “Explaining Explaining.” Erkenntnis 15: 211-243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, Bas C. (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar