In:Educating in Dialog: Constructing meaning and building knowledge with dialogic technology
Edited by Sebastian Feller and Ilker Yengin
[Dialogue Studies 24] 2014
► pp. 33–49
Understanding and explaining
Published online: 14 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.24.02doo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.24.02doo
The quest to provide a fundamental understanding and explanation of reality is
an ambitious one. Perhaps it is too ambitious. The possible restrictions for such
an enterprise to be successful must be inquired in order to determine the issue.
Section 1 explores one’s understanding in reaching (scientific) conclusions:
to what extent does a successful account testify to understanding? Section 2
focuses on the other side of such an account: does it provide an explanation
in a more fundamental sense than pointing out causes of phenomena, or is it
restricted to such a task? A critical stance vis-à-vis the (scientific) enterprise
of unearthing reality’s structure remains necessary in order not to confuse a
consistent and productive theory with one that demonstrates an understanding
and explanation in the sense of this article.
References (22)
Aristotle. 1960 [± 350 BCE]. Physica. Aristotelis Opera, vol. 1. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Berkeley, George. 1949 [1710]. “A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge.” In The Works of George Berkeley, vol. 2, ed. by A.A. Luce, and T.E. Jessop. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons.
. 1951 [1721]. “De Motu.” In The Works of George Berkeley, vol. 4. ed. by A.A. Luce, and T.E. Jessop. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons.
Comte, Auguste. 1968 [1830]. Cours De Philosophie Positive, part 1. Œuvres d’Auguste Comte, vol. 1. Paris: Éditions anthropos
Fine, Arthur. 1986. The Shaky Game. Einstein, Realism and the Quantum Theory. Chicago, IL/London: University of Chicago Press.
Hume, David. 2000 [1748]. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. ed. by T. Beauchamp. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
James, William. 1975 [1907]. Pragmatism. A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Kant, Immanuel. 1904 [1781/1787]. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Kant’s gesammelte Schriften. Erste Abteilung: Werke. Band 3 (Kant’s collected writings. First section: Works. vol. 3). Berlin: Georg Reimer.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Molière. 1886 [1673]. Le Malade Imaginaire, ed. by E. Despois and P. Mesnard. Œuvres de Molière, vol. 9. Paris: Librairie Hachette
Newton, Isaac. 1726. Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London: Apud Guil. and Joh. Innys.
Priest, Graham. 1989. “Classical Logic aufgehoben.” In Paraconsistent Logic. Essays on the Inconsistent, ed. by Graham Priest, Richard Routley, and Jean Norman, 131–145. München, Hamden, Wien: Philosophia Verlag.
Rescher, Nicholas. 2000. Nature and Understanding. The Metaphysics and Method of Science. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
. 1991. Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Philosophical Papers, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schrödinger, Erwin. 1935. “Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik.” Die Naturwissenschaften 23 (48): 807–812.
Weigand, Edda. 2010. Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.