Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 22, 2025
06:35
Examining Recall Memory in Infancy and Early Childhood Using the Elicited Imitation Paradigm
Published on: April 28, 2016
34.9K
Historicity and explanation.
Marc Ereshefsky1, Derek Turner2
1Department of Philosophy, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, Northwest Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
|May 9, 2020
Summary
This paper defines the historical character of scientific explanations and evaluates their strengths. It introduces a new narrative framework, emphasizing retrospective knowledge and specific historical features.
Area of Science:
- Philosophy of Science
- History and Philosophy of Science
Background:
- Scientific explanations can possess a distinct historical nature.
- Understanding historicity is crucial for evaluating scientific narratives.
Purpose of the Study:
- To define the essential characteristics of historical scientific explanations.
- To establish criteria for assessing the strength of historical explanations.
- To propose an alternative philosophical account of historical narrative in science.
Main Methods:
- Critical analysis of existing work on historicity (Beatty, Desjardins).
- Development of an alternative narrative framework drawing on established philosophers (Gallie, Danto, Mink, Hull).
- Identification and emphasis on underemphasized features of historical narrative.
Main Results:
- Historical explanations are characterized by specific features.
- Four key elements of narrative explanation are highlighted: central subjects, historical trajectories, retrospective knowledge, and evaluative criteria.
- A refined understanding of what constitutes a strong or weak historical narrative is presented.
Conclusions:
- The proposed framework offers a more robust account of historical scientific explanation.
- Recognizing retrospective knowledge and narrative structure enhances our understanding of scientific history.
- This work provides tools for better evaluating the historical dimension of scientific accounts.
Related Concept Videos
01:12Hindsight Biases
4.2K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?
4.2K
01:28Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
1.0K
The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
1.0K
01:14Fundamental Attribution Error
13.6K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.6K
01:30Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I
908
The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:
908
01:15Theory of Attribution I: Correspondent Inference Theory
311
Correspondent inference theory, proposed by Jones and Davis in 1965, seeks to explain how individuals infer stable personality traits from observed behaviors. It suggests that people attribute actions to underlying dispositions rather than external circumstances, particularly when the behavior appears intentional and socially significant.Voluntary Behavior and Dispositional AttributionAccording to this theory, individuals are more likely to attribute behavior to personal traits when it appears...
311
01:15Causes of Social Behavior II: Cognitive Processes
148
Cognitive processes affect social behavior by guiding how individuals perceive, interpret, and respond to social stimuli. These mental processes enable individuals to assess others' behaviors, attribute causes to their actions, and form expectations based on past experiences.Causes of Behavior and Social JudgmentsIndividuals determine the causes of others' behaviors by distinguishing between personal traits and external circumstances. For example, if a friend frequently arrives late, an...
148