Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How-possibly explanations in biology

  • Published:
Acta Biotheoretica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biologists in many different fields of research give how-possibly explanations of the phenomena they study. Although such explanations lack empirical support, and might be regarded by some as “unscientific,” they play an important heuristic role in biology by helping biologists develop theories and concepts and suggesting new areas of research. How-possibly explanations serve as a useful framework for conducting research in the absence of adequate empiri cal data, and they can even become how-actually explanations if they gain enough empirical support.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albers, B. (1987). Competence as the man factor determining the size of the neural plate. Development, Growth, and Differentiation 29: 535–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayala, F. (1982). Population and Evolutionary Genetics. Menlo Park, California, Benjamin/Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R. N. (1990). Adaptation and the Environment. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody, B. (1972). Towards an Aristotelian theory of scientific explanation. Philosophy of Science 39: 20–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bynum, W. (1978). Louis Pasteur: In pursuit of the infinitely small. In: R. Porter, ed., Man Masters Nature. New York, George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species. London, John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dray, W. (1957). Laws and Explanation in History. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dray, W. (1964). Philosophy of History. Englewood Cliffs, NJ., Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York, The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lennox, J. (1989). Darwinian thought experiments. a function for just-so stories?. International Conference on the History, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Biology, June 23, 1989.

  • O'Hara, R. (1988). Homage to Clio, or, toward an historical philosophy for evolutionary biology. Systematic Zoology 37: 142–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papaioannou, V. (1988). Investigation of the tissue specificity of the lethal yellow (Ay) gene in mouse embryos. Developmental Genetics 9: 155–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D. (1989). Adaptationist explanations. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 20: 193–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruben, J. and A. Bennett, (1987). The evolution of bone. Evolution 41: 1187–1197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, W. (1984). Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (1978). The best explanation: criteria for theory choice. Journal of Philosophy 75: 76–92.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Wyoming, 82071-3392, Laramie, WY, U.S.A.

    David B. Resnik

Authors
  1. David B. Resnik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

I am grateful to Robert Brandon and Michael Resnik for helpful comments and criticism.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Resnik, D.B. How-possibly explanations in biology. Acta Biotheor 39, 141–149 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00046596

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00046596

Keywords

Search

Navigation