Theories explain, and so do historical narratives: But there are differences

Journal of the Philosophy of History

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 237-243

  Stueber, Karsten R ^a  

^a Department of Biology   (United States)

Author keywords

Explanation; Narrative realism and anti realism; Theoretical reduction; Understanding

Indexed keywords

EID: 62449167785     PISSN: 1872261X     EISSN: 18722636     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/187226308X315068     Document Type: Review

References (8)

1. See P. Roth, "The Object of Understanding," in H.H. Kögler, and K. Stueber (eds.) Empathy and Agency: The Problem of Understanding in the Human Sciences (Boulder: Westview Press, 2000), 243-269
2. and "Beyond Understanding: The Career of the Concept of Understanding in Human Sciences, in St. Turner and P. Roth (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of the Social Sciences (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2003), 311-333
3. See particularly K. Stueber Rediscovering Empathy: Agency, Folk Psychology, and the Human Sciences (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006)
4. "The Psychological Basis of Historical Explanation: Reenactment, Simulation and the Fusion of Horizons," History and Theory 41 (2002), 24-42
5. and "Reasons, Generalizations, Empathy, and Narratives: The Epistemic Structure of Action Explanation," History and Theory 47 (2008), 31-43
6. For my general view on the nature of explanation see chapter 5 of my Rediscovering Empathy. The above remarks should not be seen as trying to resurrect Hempel's formal model of explanation
7. For my attempt to develop a realist but pluralistic conception of historical narratives see "Agency and the Objectivity of Historical Narratives," in W. Sweet (ed.), The Philosophy of History: A Reexamination, (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Press, 2004), 197-222
8. See his response to my "Reasons, Generalizations, Empathy, and Narratives: The Epistemic Structure of Action Explanation" in his "Three Dogmas (More or Less) of Explanation," History and Theory 47 (2008), 65ff