Abstract
The conceptual dichotomy of Erklären and Verstehen (explaining vs. understanding) has a revealing dual status. On the one hand, it has something of an antiquated air to it, as we loosely associate its origins with the work of Wilhelm Dilthey and other nineteenth-century German philosophers who are not widely read any more, at least not within contemporary Anglo-American history and philosophy of the human sciences. At the same time, however, remnants of the dichotomy still come up in various guises and in various areas of contemporary philosophy and philosophy of science. One example is the long-standing debate over the logical status of action explanations (“reasons vs. causes”) in philosophy of mind (Davidson 1980), and associated issues of “teleological explanations” and the explanatory status of laws of nature in the philosophy of the human sciences (Dray 1957; Hempel 1965; von Wright 1971). Another is the question of whether the subject matter of the social sciences requires a special type of interpretative, hermeneutic, or perhaps even empathetic, “access” (Collingwood 1946; Winch 1964; Taylor [1971] 1985). More recently, there has been renewed interest in the question of how to explicate our capacity to interpret another person’s actions (see the recent suggestion that the “theory-theory” vs. “simulation theory” distinction is similar to some aspects of the Erklären/Verstehen distinction) (Kögler and Stueber 2000). And within mainstream analytical philosophy of the social sciences, one of the central topics has long been the question of whether social facts/events can be reduced to the explanations of the actions of individuals (e.g., Kincaid 1997), raising questions about the units at which explanatory and/or interpretive efforts ought to be directed. (“individualism” vs. “holism”). This question can be traced back to early twentieth-century debates in economics and other emerging social sciences (Udehn 2001).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Collingwood RG (1946) The Idea of History. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Davidson D (1980) Actions, reasons, and causes. In: Essays on Actions and Events. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 3-19 (first published 1963)
Dray W (1957) Laws and Explanation in History. Oxford University Press, London
Feest U (2007) ‘Hypotheses, everywhere only hypotheses!’ On some contexts of Dilthey’s critique of explanatory psychology. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 38(1):43-62
Hempel CG (1965) The function of general laws in history. In: Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays. The Free Press, Glencoe, IL (first published in 1942)
Kincaid H (1997) Individualism and the unity of science. Essays on Reduction, Explanation, and the Special Sciences. Rowman & Littlfield, Lanham MD
Kusch M (2003) Explanation and understanding: The debate over von Wright’s philosophy of action revisited. Poznani Stud Philos Sci Human 80:327-353
Kögler HH, Stueber K (2000) Introduction: Empathy, simulation, and interpretation in the philosophy of social science. In: Kögler H, Stueber K (eds) Empathy and Agency. The Problem of Understanding in the Human Sciences. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp 1-61
Taylor C ([1971] 1985) Interpretation and the sciences of man. In: Philosophy and the human Sciences: Philosophical Papers 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 15-57 (first published in 1971: Rev Metaphys 3-51)
Udehn L (2001) Methodological Individualism: Background, History and Meaning. Routledge, London
von Wright G-H (1971) Explanation and understanding. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY
Winch P (1964) Understanding a primitive society. Am Philos Quart 1(4):307-324
Wittkau A (1992) Historismus. Zur geschichte des begriffs und des problems. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Feest, U. (2010). Historical Perspectives on Erklären and Verstehen: Introduction. In: Feest, U. (eds) Historical Perspectives on Erklären and Verstehen. Archimedes, vol 21. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3540-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3540-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3539-4
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3540-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawHistory (R0)