- Home
- What is 'Logic'?
- Logical Issues
- Elementary Semantics
- (Types of) Understanding
- *(Types of) Definition
- Varieties of 'Implication'
- The Role of 'Proofs'
- Propositional Logic, Deontic Logic
- 'Explanation'
- Falsification
- Concluding
- Types of Circularity
- Modality
- Category Mistakes
- 'a priori', 'analytic', 'contingent'
- 'Formal Logic'
- Common Language in Philosophy
- Definition
- Logical Flaws in Literature
- Schlick's (1936) definitions of 'meaning'
- Quine's (1951) rejection of 'analytic truths'
- Moore's (1903) 'analysis' of 'good'
- (v) Frege's (1892) definition of 'Bedeutung'
- ((v)) Lewis' (1970) re-definition of "true"
- (v) Quine's (1951) re-definition of "analytic"
- (v) Davidson's (1967) discussion of a fictive 'Frege' theory
- 'Formal Logic'
- Contact
- Notizblock
- Elementary Semantics
- (Types of) Understanding
- *(Types of) Definition
- Varieties of 'Implication'
- The Role of 'Proofs'
- Propositional Logic, Deontic Logic
- 'Explanation'
- Falsification
- Concluding
- Types of Circularity
- Modality
- Category Mistakes
- 'a priori', 'analytic', 'contingent'
- 'Formal Logic'
- Common Language in Philosophy
The notion of "an explanation" is exceedingly popular in philosophical literature.
Attention: There are different uses of the term "explain"/"explanation", regularly mingled up, among them:
o causal explanation (@giving a cause)
o rational explanation (@giving a reason)
o terminological explanation (@explaining the meaning of)
When philosophers demand an "explanation" of their opponents, or complain about the lack of "explanatory value" of an account, they often confuse two of these senses, or even fail to have any clear conception of what their talk aims at.