How do we understand the nature of scientific explanation and prediction?
Pro Research Analysisby 
Searched over 200M research papers
Consensus Meter
Understanding the Nature of Scientific Explanation and Prediction
Logical Similarities and Differences Between Prediction and Explanation
In the philosophy of science, prediction and explanation are often viewed as logically similar processes. Both involve reasoning to support a hypothesis, with the primary distinction being temporal: predictions concern future events, while explanations address past occurrences. This pragmatic difference underscores that while explanations provide understanding of phenomena that have already happened, predictions forecast what is yet to occur.
The Role of Explanation in Scientific Understanding
Explanation is considered one of the cardinal aims of science, alongside prediction and control. However, it is often seen as the most inscrutable because it aims at scientific understanding, an intrinsic good of science itself. Philosophers like Hempel have contributed significantly to this field by describing the nature of scientific explanations without necessarily claiming they provide "true understanding". This approach has shaped much of the contemporary philosophy of scientific explanation.
Deductive and Inductive Approaches in Prediction and Explanation
Scientific prediction and explanation can be approached through both deductive and inductive reasoning. Deductive approaches often involve deriving specific predictions or explanations from general laws, a method favored by logical positivists. On the other hand, inductive reasoning allows for predictions based on observed patterns without necessarily understanding the underlying mechanisms, such as predicting the sunrise based on past observations.
The Symmetry Thesis and Its Controversies
The symmetry thesis posits that explanation and prediction are fundamentally the same from a logical standpoint. This thesis has been a subject of debate, with some scholars supporting it and others, like Rescher, offering alternative views. The factor of temporality is crucial here, raising questions about whether there is merely a temporal anisotropy between explanation and prediction or if they are philosophically distinct.
Explanation as a Cognitive Tool
Recent discussions suggest that explanation should be viewed as a cognitive tool that aids in generating new predictions. This perspective argues that the neglect of prediction in theories of explanation has impoverished our understanding of scientific processes. By reintroducing prediction into the framework of explanation, we can better understand what makes an explanation scientific and why inference to the best explanation is a valid scientific method.
The Importance of Models in Prediction and Explanation
Models play a crucial role in both prediction and explanation. In fields like ecology, models are essential for making accurate predictions and demonstrating scientific understanding. The development and testing of models help refine our understanding by identifying new variables, elucidating functional relationships, and improving parameter estimates.
Explanation and Prediction in Social Sciences
In social sciences, there has traditionally been a focus on providing interpretable causal mechanisms rather than predictive accuracy. However, the rise of computational methods is shifting this focus towards better standardization of predictive practices and recognizing the complementary nature of predictive accuracy and interpretability. This shift aims to enhance the replicability and utility of social science research.
Historical Natural Science and Common Cause Explanation
In historical natural sciences, the connection between explanation and justification is emphasized. Adequate historical explanations often rely on the principle of common cause, which is justified by the time asymmetry of causation. This principle helps distinguish historical explanations from mere predictions, highlighting the unique methodological approaches in these fields.
Conclusion
Understanding the nature of scientific explanation and prediction involves recognizing their logical similarities and differences, the roles of deductive and inductive reasoning, and the importance of models. While explanations aim to provide understanding of past events, predictions forecast future occurrences. Both are essential for advancing scientific knowledge, and their interplay continues to shape the philosophy of science.
Sources and full results
Most relevant research papers on this topic