Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Covering laws: general statements of law which, together with empirical conditions within the so-called deductive-nomological model (according to Hempel and Oppenheim) form the premises from which causal explanations can be obtained. See also explanation, causal explanation.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
I 17
covering law: thesis: there is a single correct explanation for each phenomenon. - CartwrightVscovering law - all Vscovering Law: does not correctly describe the causes
I 44
Def covering law model / Hempel / Cartwright: assumes that we need to know all the natural laws, and a little logic and possibly probability theory. Then we know what factors explain what other factors - I 45: many authors Vs: allows for too much - e.g. Henry is not pregnant because he takes birth control pills - E.x. Barometer explains storm.

Car I
N. Cartwright
How the laws of physics lie Oxford New York 1983

> Counter arguments against Cartwright
> Counter arguments in relation to Covering Laws

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-29