Let us take the following statement: "Critical thinking textbooks
often contain many examples of explanations." My question is this,
is this statement an arguement, explanation, or neither? I believe it is
neither. An arguement is an attempt to prove or convince someone of a
claim with reasons for the claim. This doesn't seem to be an
arguement. An explanation is supposed to have cause and effect. I
don't think this has cause and effect. However, an explanation also
is intended to make another claim, object, event --- intelligible. So
does it make the object (critical thinking textbooks) intelligible? I
suppose it does. Also, an
explanation is supposed to be verifiable. This does appear to be
verifiable. So it appears to satisfy some of the criteria for an
explanation, but not all. As I stated earlier, it is my gut feeling
that this is neither, but I am not really sure. To recap: my question
is as follows-
Is this an arguement, an explanation, or neither? And I need an
explanation as well. WHY is it what it is? Thank you for your
anticipated time and effort. Evolution and Philosophy: Tautology::
The answer to this version of the argument is the same as to the simplistic Arguments for the second view - that selective explanations need supplementing
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/tautology.htmlHOME |
Dear tmetz001,
Your hunch is correct. The sentence
Critical thinking textbooks often contain many examples of explanations.
is neither an explanation nor an argument.
Consider the definition of "explanation", which relies on that of
"explain".
"explanation 1. The act or process of explaining: launched into a
detailed explanation. 2. Something that explains: That was supposedly
the explanation for their misdeeds. 3. A mutual clarification of
misunderstandings; a reconciliation."
Bartleby: American Heritage Dictionary: explain
http://www.bartleby.com/61/79/E0287900.html
"explain VERB: 1. To make plain or comprehensible. 2. To define;
expound: We explained our plan to the committee. 3a. To offer reasons
for or a cause of; justify: explain an error. b. To offer reasons for
the actions, beliefs, or remarks of (oneself). INTRANSITIVE VERB:
To make something plain or comprehensible: Let me explain."
Bartleby: American Heritage Dictionary: explanation
http://www.bartleby.com/61/78/E0287800.html
Although the sentence mentions explanations found in textbooks, it
does not in itself explain anything. Nothing is clarified, defined,
or justified by the sentence alone.
Is it, however, an argument? Consider the definition.
"argument 1a. A discussion in which disagreement is expressed;
a debate. b. A quarrel; a dispute. c. Archaic A reason or matter for
dispute or contention: ?"sheath'd their swords for lack of argument"
(Shakespeare). 2a. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth
or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial
life. b. A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a
reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying
a house now. c. A set of statements in which one follows logically
as a conclusion from the others. 3a. A summary or short statement of
the plot or subject of a literary work. b. A topic; a subject: ?"You
and love are still my argument" (Shakespeare). 4. Logic The minor
premise in a syllogism. 5. Mathematics a. The independent variable of
a function. b. The angle of a complex number measured from the positive
horizontal axis. 6. Computer Science A value used to evaluate a procedure
or subroutine. 7. Linguistics In generative grammar, any of various
positions occupied by a noun phrase in a sentence."
Bartleby: American Heritage Dictionary: argument
http://www.bartleby.com/61/94/A0419400.html
Again, our sentence fails to meet the criteria. It does not express
a disagreement or take part in one. The sentence on its own fails to
demonstrate a truth or falsehood, to offer proof or evidence, to summarize
a literary work, or to lay out a syllogism. Thus, it is not an argument.
The sentence might well be part of an argument or of an explanation,
but that does not make it an argument or an explanation. We must not
identify the part with the whole. Although a transmission is part of a
car, it does constitute a car. In the same way, a door is not a house,
a wing is not an airplane, and the sentence above is not an argument or
an explanation.
Another important philosophical point is that even if the sentence
shares some attributes with arguments and explanations, that does not
suffice to put it in one of these categories. You point out that it
makes a verifiable claim, which is something that explanations as well
as arguments ought to do, but that isn't saying much. Every statement
makes a claim, sometimes a verifiable one, but that doesn't make every
statement an argument or an explanation. Jokes are made of words,
just like arguments and explanations, but a joke is not an argument or
an explanation.
Consider the dodo, a flightless bird of Mauritius. If we come upon
an ostrich, should we say that it is a dodo? An ostrich is a bird,
after all, and it cannot fly. But that is not enough to make it a dodo,
because there are many other criteria it does not satisfy: ostriches are
not extinct, they are not found on Mauritius, they could never breed
with dodos, and so on. Similarly, one cannot argue that the sentence
above is an explanation or an argument merely because it shares some
traits with either of these. There are many crucial traits it does not
share with them, so it does not qualify as either.
Regards,
leapinglizard Amazon.com: Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation ::
Amazon.com: Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation (Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Science): James Woodward: Books
http://www.amazon.com/Making-Things-Happen-Explanation-Philosophy/dp/0195155270HOME |
Reductive explanation and the explanatory gap::
about the success or otherwise of the various proposed reductive explanations. traditional treatments of reductive explanation in the philosophy of science.
http://www.philosophy.umd.edu/Faculty/pcarruthers/Reductive-explanation.htmHOME |
 Where's The Advantage In Windows Genuine Advantage?
 Stocks Bounce After S&P Joins Bear Market
|
