Norms, invariance, and explanatory relevance

Philosophy of the Social Sciences

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 324-338

  Henderson, David ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

^b University of Memphis   (United States)

Author keywords

Erotetic; Explanation; Invariance; Laws; Norms; Social sciences

Indexed keywords

EID: 24944592505     PISSN: 00483931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0048393105277989     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Brandom, R. 1994. Making it explicit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Henderson, D. 1993. Interpretation and explanation in the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.
3. _. 1996. Simulation theory vs. simulation theory: A difference without a difference in explanation. Southern Journal of Philosophy 34 (Spindel Conference suppl.): 65-94.
4. _. 2002. Norms, normative principles, and explanation. Philosophy of Social Science 32:329-64.
5. Henderson, D., and T. Horgan. 2000. Simulation and epistemic competence. In Empathy and agency: The problem of understanding in the social sciences, edited by H. Kogler and K. Stueber. Boulder, CO: Westview.
6. Humphreys, P. 1989. The chances of explanation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7. Khalifa, K. 2004. Erotetic contextualism, data-gathering procedures, and sociological explanations of social mobility. Philosophy of Social Science 34:38-54.
8. Kitcher, P., and W. Salmon. 1987. Van Fraassen on explanation. Journal of Philosophy 84:315-30.
9. Risjord, M. 1998. Norms and explanation in the social sciences. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 29:223-37.
10. _. 2000. Woodcutters and witchcraft. Albany: State University of New York Press.
11. Salmon, W. 1989. Four decades of scientific explanation. In Scientific explanation, edited by P. Kitcher and W. Salmon, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 13, 3-219. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
12. Van Fraassen, B. 1980. The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon.
13. Woodward, P. 2000. Explanation and invariance in the special sciences. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51:197-254.
14. _. 2001. Law and explanation in biology: Invariance is the kind of stability that matters. Philosophy of Science 68:1-20.