Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T17:15:57.998Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking Mechanistic Explanation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Stuart Glennan
Stuart Glennan*
Affiliation:
Butler University
*
Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy and Religion, 4600 Sunset Ave., Butler University, Indianapolis, IN 46208–3487; sglennan@butler.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Philosophers of science typically associate the causal-mechanical view of scientific explanation with the work of Railton and Salmon. In this paper I shall argue that the defects of this view arise from an inadequate analysis of the concept of mechanism. I contrast Salmon's account of mechanisms in terms of the causal nexus with my own account of mechanisms, in which mechanisms are viewed as complex systems. After describing these two concepts of mechanism, I show how the complex-systems approach avoids certain objections to Salmon's account of causal-mechanical explanation. I conclude by discussing how mechanistic explanations can provide understanding by unification.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 69 , Issue S3 , September 2002 , pp. S342 - S353
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bechtel, William, and Richardson, Robert (1993), Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Glennan, Stuart (1996), “Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation”, Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation 44:49–71.Google Scholar
Glennan, Stuart (1997), “Capacities, Universality and Singularity”, Capacities, Universality and Singularity 64:605–626.Google Scholar
Glennan, Stuart (under review), “A Model of Models”.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Phillip (1981), “Explanatory Unification”, Explanatory Unification 48:507–531.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Phillip (1989), “Explanatory Unification and the Causal Structure of the World”, in , Kitcher and , Salmon (eds.), Scientific Explanation: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 13. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 410–505.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Phillip, and Salmon, Wesley (eds.) (1989), Scientific Explanation: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 13. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Machamer, Peter, Darden, Lindley, and Craver, Carl (2000), “Thinking about Mechanisms”, Thinking about Mechanisms 67:1–25.Google Scholar
Railton, Peter (1978), “A Deductive-Nomological Model of Probabilistic Explanation”, A Deductive-Nomological Model of Probabilistic Explanation 45:206–226.Google Scholar
Railton, Peter (1981), “Probability, Explanation, and Information”, Probability, Explanation, and Information 48:233–256.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley (1984), Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley (1989), “Four Decades of Scientific Explanation”, in , Kitcher and , Salmon (eds.), Scientific Explanation: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 13. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 3–219.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley (1994), “Causality without Counterfactuals”, Causality without Counterfactuals 61:297–312.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim (1996), “Explanatory Pluralism in Evolutionary Biology”, Explanatory Pluralism in Evolutionary Biology 11:193–214.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William (1994), “The Ontology of Complex Systems: Levels, Perspectives and Causal Thickets”, The Ontology of Complex Systems: Levels, Perspectives and Causal Thickets 20 (supplement): 207–274.Google Scholar
Woodward, James (2000), “Explanation and Invariance in the Special Sciences”, Explanation and Invariance in the Special Sciences 51, 197–254.Google Scholar