Partial explanations in social science’

In Harold Kincaid (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science. Oxford University Press. pp. 130-153 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Comparing different causes’ importance, and apportioning responsibility between them, requires making good sense of the notion of partial explanation, that is, of degree of explanation. How much is this subjective, how much objective? If the causes in question are probabilistic, how much is the outcome due to them and how much to simple chance? I formulate the notion of degree of causation, or effect size, relating it to influential recent work in the literature on causation. I examine to what extent mainstream social science methods--both quantitative and qualitative--succeed in establishing effect sizes so understood. The answer turns out to be, roughly: only to some extent. Next, the standard understanding of effect size, even though widespread, still has several underappreciated consequences. I detail some of those. Finally, I discuss the separate issue of explanandum-dependence, which is essential to assessing any cause’s explanatory importance and yet which has been comparatively neglected.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Partial explanations in social science.Robert Northcott - 2012 - In Harold Kincaid (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science. Oxford University Press. pp. 130--153.
Degree of explanation.Robert Northcott - 2012 - Synthese 190 (15):3087-3105.
Weighted explanations in history.Robert Northcott - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (1):76-96.
Eight Other Questions about Explanation.Angela Potochnik - 2018 - In Alexander Reutlinger & Juha Saatsi (eds.), Explanation Beyond Causation: Philosophical Perspectives on Non-Causal Explanations. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Proportionality in Causation, Part I: Theories.Ezra Rubenstein - 2024 - Philosophy Compass 19 (1):e12957.
Causal Contribution.Alex Kaiserman - 2016 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116 (3):387-394.
Formal Causes for Powers Theorists.Giacomo Giannini & Stephen Mumford - 2021 - In Ludger Jansen & Petter Sandstad (eds.), Neo-Aristotelian Perspectives on Formal Causation. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 87-106.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-10-24

Downloads
436 (#66,445)

6 months
116 (#48,532)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Northcott
Birkbeck, University of London

Citations of this work

Harm and Causation.Robert Northcott - 2015 - Utilitas 27 (2):147-164.
Degree of explanation.Robert Northcott - 2012 - Synthese 190 (15):3087-3105.
Prediction, history and political science.Robert Northcott - 2022 - In Harold Kincaid & Jeroen van Bouwel (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Political Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Conceived this way: innateness defended.Northcott Robert - forthcoming - Philosophers' Imprint.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Scientific Image.William Demopoulos & Bas C. van Fraassen - 1982 - Philosophical Review 91 (4):603.
The nature of explanation.Peter Achinstein - 1983 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Cause and Norm.Christopher Hitchcock & Joshua Knobe - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy 106 (11):587-612.
Dissecting explanatory power.Petri Ylikoski & Jaakko Kuorikoski - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 148 (2):201–219.

View all 22 references / Add more references