P. Churchland argued for the nomological character of action explanation by presenting an alleged law - I call it below L2 - which, according to Churchland, we make use ofimplicitly when explaining rational actions. I shall argue that Churchland 'sargumentation is not complete because he does not exclude an alternative interpretation of L2. According to this alternative interpretation, L2 is not a law, but, it indicates the general form of complete action explanations. I shall argue that this alternative interpretation is (...) more acceptable than Churchland 's interpretation of L2 as a law. Moreover, if the alleged law is interpreted as the general form of action explanations, then Churchland 's article even transforms itself into a confirmation ofthe non-nomological character of action explanation. I conclude my article with some short remarks about action explanation as a kind of non-nomological explanation. (shrink)

The concept of primary energy is fundamental in energy economy and ecology. However, even in the specialized literature there is still no consistent usage of this concept. We shall present a wide-spread concept that can be considered as the original concept of primary energy. But, examining primary energy statistics, we shall find that the usage of the term >primary energy primary energy< even in the specialized literature originated from the problem of coping with the renewable energies using the conceptual instruments (...) that were developed for an energy system based on fossil and nuclear fuels. (shrink)