Last update:
06-Jun-2005

Explanation along with prediction are the two main components of scientific knowledge. Today, we think of scientific explanation as the answer to the question "why this phenomenon happens?". The nature of scientific explanation has been, and still is, a field of intense philosophical discussion and debate. Hempel and Oppenheim first proposed an answer to this problem by stating that scientific explanations are essentially arguments that contain empirical laws (inferential view). This theory had a deep effect on the philosophic thought for many years but was also intensively criticized due to the logical inconsistencies it produced. Salmon and Lewis sought to replace the inferential view with a causal theory, which postulated that an explanation constitutes essentially a description of the causes of an event (causal view). On the other hand, van Fraassen's pragmatic view states that explanation is the body of information suggesting that an event is more likely to happen over its alternatives. Finally, other modern theories about explanation have had so far only limited acceptance. Nevertheless, despite the different approaches and disagreements of the philosophers of science about the nature of scientific explanation, the whole discussion has greatly helped us to understand that the aim of science is not only to describe empirical phenomena but also to explain why these phenomena happen.

Key words: Induction, Inference, Science, Scientific law, Statistical relevance.