Complexity and explanation in the social sciences

Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 130-145

  Mitchell, Sandra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012173154     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511812880.012     Document Type: Chapter

References (23)

1. Beatty, J. 1995. “The Evolutionary Contingency Thesis.” In G. Wolters and J. G. Lennox (eds.) Concepts, Theories, and Rationality in the Biological Sciences. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 45-81.
2. Beatty, J. 1997. “Why do biologists argue like they do?,” Philosophy of Science 64: 432-443.
3. Condorcet, N. de 1792. Rapport et projet de decret sur l'organisation generale de l'instruction publique. Compayre, G. (ed.) Paris 1883, p. 120 quoted in F. A. von Hayek “The counter-revolution of science” Economica 1941, pp. 9-36.
4. Earman, J. and J. Roberts 1999. “Ceteris paribus, There is no problem of provisos,” Synthese 439-478.
5. Earman, J., J. Roberts, and S. Smith 2002. “Ceteris paribus post,” Erkenntnis 281-301.
6. Elgin, M. 2003. “Biology and a priori laws,” Philosophy of Science 70: 1380-1389.
7. Goodman, N. 1966. “The new riddle of induction,” Journal of Philosophy 63: 281-331.
8. Gould, S. J. 1990. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
9. Hayek, F. A. von 1941. “The counter-revolution of science”, Economica, pp. 9-36.
10. Hempel, C. G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York, NY: Free Press.
11. Kincaid, H. 1996. Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. McIntyre, L. C. 1996. Laws and Explanation in the Social Sciences: Defending a Science of Human Behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
13. Mitchell, S. D. 1997. “Pragmatic Laws.” In L. Darden (ed.) PSA 1996: Part II, Symposia Papers, Philosophy of Science (special issue), pp. S468-S479.
14. Mitchell, S. D. 2000. “Dimensions of scientific law,” Philosophy of Science 67: 242-265.
15. Mitchell, S. D. 2002a. “Ceteris Paribus-An Inadequate Representation for Biological Contingency.” In Earman, J., C. Glymour, and S. D. Mitchell (eds.) Erkenntnis 57: 329-350.
16. Mitchell, S. D. 2002b. “Contingent Generalizations: Lessons from Biology.” In R. Mayntz (ed.) Akteure, Mechanismen, Modelle. Zur Theoriefahigkeit makro-sozialer Analysen. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, pp. 179-195.
17. Mitchell, S. D. 2002c. “Integrative pluralism,” Biology and Philosophy 17(1): 55-70.
18. Nelson, A. 1986. “Explanation and justification in political philosophy,” Ethics 97(1): 154-176.
19. Pietroski, P. and G. Rey 1995. “When other things aren't equal: Saving ceteris paribus laws from vacuity,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46: 81-110.
20. Smart, J. J. C. 1968. Between Science and Philosophy: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. New York, NY: Random House.
21. Sober, E. 1997. “Two outbreaks of lawlessness in recent philosophy of biology,” Philosophy of Science 64: 458-467.
22. Weinberg, S. 1993. The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe. New York, NY: Basic Books.
23. Woodward, J. 2002. “There is no such thing as a ceteris paribus law,” Erkenntnis 57: 303-328.