EXPLANATION
| Collection | International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics |
|---|---|
| Year | 2004 |
| Vol. (num.) | 2(1) |
| ID | ◀ 1227 ▶ |
| Object type | Epistemology, ontology or semantics |
- “Any theory that logically implies,… reconstructs or generates what has in fact been observed” (K. KRIPPENDORFF, 1986, p.30).
M. BUNGE (as quoted by J. CASTI, 1990, p.38-40) distinguishes causal and noncausal explanation and typifies them as follows:
Causal explanations
a) Inclusion in a sequence
b) Tracing origins and evolution
c) Connection with other facts
d) Analysis
Noncausal explanations
e) Membership in a class
f) Description
g) Static structure
h) Reference to a lower level
i) Reference to a higher level
j) Statistic
k) Teleology
l) Dialectic
CASTI comments: “Causal explanation will be found only within the laws of science and nature, not outside them. In short, scientific explanation is explanation by law, not by causes” (p.40).
\it Explanation (Systemic)
More specifically, systemic explanation rests on a systemic epistemology, based on general principles related to observational conditions and conceptual construction. It also uses general isomorphic models that can be applied to describe a great number of similar processes and structures.
Systemic explanation does not suppresses nor supplants traditional rational and scientific explanation, as it is directed to a different type of objects. It merely creates a wider frame within which they become included and can still be used when specifically efficient.
However, to round up in a more skeptical and general mood, BATESON believed that any explanation simply connects two statements in a semantic way. This is the case for any explanation, but it leaves always open the possibility that one must in the end accept or reject such semantic arrangements as bona fide “explanation”(within brackets!)
See also
Purpose