|Wright I 34
History/Explanation/Laws/Dray/Wright, G. H.: William Dray (W. Dray: Laws and Explanation in History, 1957) pursues a completely different explanation than Popper and Hempel.
DrayVsHempel/DrayVsPopper/Dray: The reason why historical explanations do not normally contain a reference to laws is not that the laws are so complex and unknown that we have to be satisfied with a mere sketch, not even that they are too trivial, but that historical explanations are not based at all on general laws.
For example, the statement that Louis XIV. was unpopular at the end of his life because he pursued a policy that was detrimental to France's national interests.
Historical Laws/Dray: The conditions for the equality of prerequisites would have to be specified. Only then would we have a real law. But the only case that falls under this law would be the one it is supposed to "explain". A recourse to this law would therefore only result in a renewed assertion of what has already been established._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Laws and Explanation in History Westport 1979
W. H. Dray
Perspectives on History Sydney 1980
Truth and Objectivity, Cambridge 1992
Wahrheit und Objektivität Frankfurt 2001
"Language-Mastery and Sorites Paradox"
Truth and Meaning, G. Evans/J. McDowell, Oxford 1976
Georg Henrik von Wright
Explanation and Understanding, New York 1971
Erklären und Verstehen Hamburg 2008