Uniqueness and historical laws

Philosophy of Science 47 (2):260-276 (1980)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper presents an argument for the claim that historical events are unique in a nontrivial sense which entails the inapplicability of the Hempelian D-N model to historical explanations. Some previous criticisms of Hempel are shown to be general criticisms of the D-N model which can be outflanked in cases where a reduction to fundamental laws is available. I then survey grounds for denying that explanations by reasons can be effectively reduced to causal explanations, and for rejecting methodological individualism. I conclude with some positive remarks concerning the structure of historical explanations and sense in which historical events are unique.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
224 (#180,876)

6 months
28 (#343,808)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Evan Fales
University of Iowa

Citations of this work

Laws and Natural History in Biology.Wim J. Van Der Steen & Harmke Kamminga - 1991 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42 (4):445-467.
A theory of historiography as a pre-science.Aviezer Tucker - 1993 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 24 (4):633-667.
In defense of historical laws.Warren Schmaus - 1983 - Philosophy of Science 50 (1):146-150.
Reasons, causes, and the 'strong programme' in the sociology of knowledge.Warren Schmaus - 1985 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 15 (2):189-196.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Psychological predicates.Hilary Putnam - 1967 - In William H. Capitan & Daniel Davy Merrill, Art, mind, and religion. [Pittsburgh]: University of Pittsburgh Press. pp. 37--48.
Causes and Conditions.J. L. Mackie - 1965 - American Philosophical Quarterly 2 (4):245 - 264.
The function of general laws in history.Carl Gustav Hempel - 1942 - Journal of Philosophy 39 (2):35-48.

View all 14 references / Add more references