Abstract
An argument has been recently proposed by Watkins, whose objective is to show the impossibility of a statistical explanation of single events. This present paper is an attempt to show that Watkins's argument is unsuccessful, and goes on to argue for an account of statistical explanation which has much in common with Hempel's classic treatment.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cramer, H.: 1946, Mathematical Methods of Statistics, Uppsala and Princeton.
de Broglie, Armand, Simon et al.: 1979, Einstein, Peebles Press.
Hempel, C.: 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation.
Howson, C.: 1983, ‘Statistical Explanation and Statistical Support’, Erkenntnis 20, 61–78.
Humphreys, P.: 1978, ‘Is Physical Randomness just Indeterminism in Disguise?’, PSA Vol. 2, 98–113.
Kolmogorov, A. N.: 1933, Foundations of the Theory of Probability, New York (this English translation was published in 1956).
Mellor, D. H.: 1976, ‘Probable Explanation’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 54, 231–241.
Schrödinger, E.: 1944, ‘The Statistical Law in Nature’, Nature 153, 704–705.
Watkins, J.: 1985, Science and Scepticism, Princeton.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I am very grateful to Peter Clark for many helpful discussions of these issues.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Howson, C. On a recent argument for the impossibility of a statistical explanation of single events, and a defence of a modified form of Hempel's theory of statistical explanation. Erkenntnis 29, 113–124 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166368
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166368