Explanations in Software Engineering: The Pragmatic Point of View
- 114 Downloads
This article reveals that explanatory practice in software engineering is in accordance with pragmatic explanatory pluralism, which states that explanations should at least partially be evaluated by their practical use. More specifically, I offer a defense of the idea that several explanation-types are legitimate in software engineering, and that the appropriateness of an explanation-type depends on (a) the engineer’s interests, and (b) the format of the explanation-seeking question he asks, with this format depending on his interests. This idea is defended by considering examples that are representative for explanatory practice in software engineering. Different kinds of technological explanation are spelled out, and the dependence of their appropriateness on interests and question-formats is extensively illustrated.
KeywordsExplanation Explanatory pluralism Explanatory power Epistemic interests Engineering
This research was supported by subventions from the Research Foundation—Flanders through research project 3G003109. I am very grateful to Erik Weber and Jeroen Van Bouwel for helping me to improve this paper. Special thanks to Dries De Winter, for guiding me into the world of computer programming, and for reviewing this paper.
- De Langhe, R. (2009). Trading off explanatory virtues. In E. Weber, T. Libert, P. Marage, & G. Vanpaemel (Eds.), Logic, philosophy and history of science in Belgium. Proceedings of the young researchers days 2008. Brussels: Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België (forthcoming).Google Scholar
- De Ridder, J. (2007). Reconstructing design, explaining artifacts. Dissertation, University of Technology, Delft.Google Scholar
- Kroes, P. (1998). Technological explanations: The relation between structure and function of technological objects. Technè, 3(3), 18–34.Google Scholar
- Mackie, J. (1974). The cement of the universe: A study of causation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- Pitt, J. C. (2001). What engineers know. Techné, 5(3), 17–30.Google Scholar
- Radu, S. (2008). The Fisher-Yates shuffle algorithm. Paper presented at the mini conference on computing algorithms, Bryn Mawr.Google Scholar
- Weber, E., & Vanderbeeken, R. (2005). The functions of intentional explanations of actions. Behavior and Philosophy, 33, 1–16.Google Scholar