Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 359–374

Physical explanations and biological explanations, empirical laws and a priori laws

Article

Abstract

Philosophers intent upon characterizing the difference between physics and biology often seize upon the purported fact that physical explanations conform more closely to the covering law model than biological explanations. Central to this purported difference is the role of laws of nature in the explanations of these two sciences. However, I argue that, although certain important differences between physics and biology can be highlighted by differences between physical and biological explanations, these differences are not differences in the degree to which those explanations conform to the covering law model, which fits biology about as well as it does physics.

Keywords

Biological laws Physical laws Covering law Deductive-nomological Empirical laws A priori laws Dispositions Rosenberg Sober Kitcher 

References

  1. Hempel C (1962) Explanation in science and history. In: Colodny RG (ed) Frontiers of Science and Philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  2. Hempel C (1966) Philosophy of natural science. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  3. Kitcher P (1985) Darwin’s achievement. In: Rescher N (ed) Reason and rationality in natural science: a group of essays. University Press of America, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  4. Kitcher P (1999) Explanatory unification. In: Boyd R, Gasper P, Trout JD (eds) The philosophy of science. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Malzkorn W (2001) Defining disposition concepts: a brief history of the problem. Stud Hist Philos Sci 32:335–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Rosenberg A (2001a) How is biological explanation possible? Br J Philos Sci 52(4):735–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Rosenberg A (2001b) Reductionism in a historical science. Philos Sci 68(2):135–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sober E (1996) Some comments on Rosenberg’s review. Philos Sci 63(3):465–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sober E (2000) Philosophy of biology, 2nd edn. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  10. Waters K (1998) Causal regularities in the biological world of contingent distributions. Biol Philos 13:5–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentCalifornia University of PennsylvaniaCaliforniaUSA

Personalised recommendations