Skip to main content

The Use of Error as an Explanatory Category in Politics

  • Chapter
Explanation

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 302))

  • 395 Accesses

Abstract

In modern science, explanation of events that relies on attributing errors to the object of analysis, implies dogmatism. However, error may be legitimately attributed to the researcher’s methods, observations, and theories. Reflection, or meta-theory, is an exception to this rule. Consequently, error cannot be attributed to the researcher’s theory or methods when they are themselves the issue under analysis. The attributing of error to the object of analysis is an extrapolated ontologization of a category of thought. The category of error, though superseded in modern natural sciences, is still in use in other fields like in political sciences. In the last analysis, there is no difference between fields of research regarding the category of error.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aguilar, Luis (ed.). Operation Zapata: The Ultrasensitive Report and Testimony of the Board ofInquiry on the Bay of Pigs (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aristotle. Metaphysics, Physics, Prior Analytics, Posterior Analytics. In Barnes, Jonathan (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle, vols. I and II. Princeton University Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bacon, Francis. Novum Organum (1620) (The New Organon, trans. By F. H. Anderson, Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill, 1960).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balaban, Oded. Politics and Ideology — A Philosophical Approach (Aldershot: Avebury, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Balaban, Oded. “The Modern Misunderstanding of Aristotle’s Theory of Motion,” Journal for General Philosophy of Science, Vol. 26, 1995, pp.1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Collingwood, R. G. The Idea ofHistory (Oxford University Press, 1946).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Collingwood, R. G. An Essay on Metaphysics (Oxford University Press, 1948).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dray, William, Laws and Explanation in History (Oxford University Press, 1960).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Drobisch, Moritz Wilhelm. Neue Darstellung der Logik nach ihren einfachsten Verhältnissen, nebst einem logischmathematischen Anhangen (Leipzig: L. Voss, 1875).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Feigl H. and Sellars W. (ed.). Readings in Philosophical Analysis, (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1949).

    Google Scholar 

  11. [Hempel 1942] Hempel, C. G. “The Function of General Laws in History,” The Journal ofPhilosophy, 1942, 35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hon, Giora. “Exploiting Errors,” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 29 (1998), 465–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mayo, Deborah G. Error and the Growth ofExperimental Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Meyerson, Émile. De l’explication dans les sciences (Paris: Payot, 1921). English transl. Explanation in the Sciences (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Neustadt, Richard and May, Ernest. Thinking in Time, The Uses ofHistory for Decision-Makers (New York: The Free Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Norris, Christopher. Resources ofRealism—Prospects for Post-Analytic Philosophy (London: Macmillan Press, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pagels, Heinz R. The Cosmic Code: Quantum Physics as the Language of Nature (New York: Bantam Books, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Popper, Karl. The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Basic Books, 1959).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Popper, Karl. Conjectures and Refutations (New York: Harper and Row, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Reichenbach, Hans. Nomological Statements and Admissible Operations (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1954).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Salmon, Wesley C. Causality and Explanation (Oxford University Press, 1998).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Swartz, Norman. The concept ofphysical law (Cambridge University Press, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  23. [White 1943] White, Morton G. “Historical Explanation,” Mind, 1943, pp.212–229.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wollheim, Richard. “Natural Laws,” in Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 5, New York: Macmillan and Free Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Balaban, O. (2001). The Use of Error as an Explanatory Category in Politics. In: Hon, G., Rakover, S.S. (eds) Explanation. Synthese Library, vol 302. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9731-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9731-9_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5827-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-015-9731-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics