Timeline for What is an explanation really?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2024 at 9:55 | answer | added | Professor Sushing | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 29, 2024 at 21:06 | answer | added | Bobi brai | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 8, 2024 at 8:47 | answer | added | Yuri Zavorotny | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 8, 2024 at 4:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Sep 10, 2023 at 3:05 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 10, 2023 at 23:04 | answer | added | Michael Kurak | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 10, 2023 at 10:29 | comment | added | Hudjefa | Well, minimally, very unfortunate for some of us, there seems to be dvi (2) of something ... anything and that is a marga (path) to somewhere betwixt 1000 AD and 1500 AD, give or take 500 years. Something like that ... most unfortunate, really. | |
| Aug 10, 2023 at 5:45 | answer | added | Bumble | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 19:46 | comment | converted from answer | Michael Kurak | To explain something is to provide a causal account of it, whether in terms of efficient or final causes. | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 19:43 | comment | added | Conifold | See SEP, Scientific Explanation for various philosophical theories of such explanation. On all of them, what is being explained must meaningfully track what explains it, so vacuities like "because God" do not qualify. | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 18:13 | comment | added | emesupap | in other words, for most theorists, there is a notion of "correct" explanation. Note that this often requires realist sentiments. | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 18:13 | comment | added | emesupap | There are a wide variety of theories of explanation: Ruben, Salmon, Van Fraassen. But given that it is not actually (true, empirically confirmed, metaphyiscally dependent, etc...) that X is more scientifically/metaphysically more likely because of Y, where Y is in the holy book, it would not constitute an explanation for most. | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 17:32 | comment | added | Mauro ALLEGRANZA | A purpoted "explanation" will be judged to be scientific, and thus a "good" one by the relevant scientific community. | |
| Aug 9, 2023 at 17:15 | history | asked | user66933 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |