Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 153 - 193
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
chapter
applies
the
framework
from
Part
I
to
interdisciplinary
explanation
(IDE),
continuing
argument
Chapter
4.
first
reprise
social
action
framework,
then
apply
it
late-stage
low-degree
IDE
(Section
5.1).
Section
5.2
explicates
three-layer
structure
of
collective
intention
for
this
case.
The
result
is
a
set
coherence
requirements
IDE,
analogous
norms
collaborating
agents.
titular
bridge
affords
mutual
relation
between
models
contributed
by
different
specializations.
New
elements
comprising
bridge,
spanning
near
and
far
sides,
reciprocally
connect
in
opposite
directions.
5.3
illustrates
these
with
detailed
example:
array
life
science
concerning
hemoglobin.
example
extends
bridging
account
more
complex,
realistic
projects.
5.4
begins
articulate
epistemic
significance
models,
task
continued
6.
5.5
concludes
summary
results
so
far.
Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 121 - 152
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
chapter
applies
the
explanatory
particularist
account
from
Part
I
to
an
important
class
of
cases
in
scientific
practice:
interdisciplinary
research.
first
survey
background
for
this
application:
empirical
and
philosophical
studies
interdisciplinarity
(Section
4.1).
Next,
argue
that
ideas
comport
well
with
key
results
literature,
offer
several
new
insights
4.2).
Section
4.3
goes
deeper
applying
I’s
framework,
focusing
on
EPM
taxonomy
model–model
relations
Chapter
2.
use
latter
classify
research
projects
relevant
explanation/understanding,
setting
up
a
challenge
explanation
(IDE)
my
response.
application
shows
role
explanation/understanding
research,
some
apparent
objections
EP
are
actually
advantages.
Features
practice
seem
incompatible
particularism
fact
support
view.
Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 322 - 332
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
short
concluding
chapter
summarizes
the
book’s
argument
and
key
results.
Three
themes
are
throughlines
for
entire
book:
explanation
as
collaborative
process
product,
diversity
epistemic
resource,
engaging
scientific
practice.
Philosophical
study
of
guided
by
those
three
departs
from
tradition,
but
rejects
only
monist
assumptions—not
other
theories
explanation.
Instead,
repurposed
resources
particularist
studies,
illustrated
in
Chapters
7–8.
reviews
overall
goals
judges
them
to
have
been
met:
exploring
idea
that
is
a
form
activity;
showing
benefits
diverse
specialized
explanations;
reconfiguring
relation
between
philosophical
theory
I
then
summarize
results
Parts
II
(see
earlier
summaries).
The
concludes
with
an
open-ended
list
cases
future
work
using
EP’s
framework
insights.
Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 81 - 118
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
chapter
develops
the
second
part
of
my
philosophical
framework
for
analyzing
particularist
explanations.
The
basic
idea
is
that
constructing
a
scientific
explanation
collaborative
activity.
I
use
resources
from
social
action
theory
to
explicate
this
idea.
first
presents
basics
philosophy
with
detailed
example
(Section
3.1)
and
survey
major
theories
3.2).
Building
on
latter,
propose
an
original
account
activity,
which
implies
norms
participants’
attitudes
3.3).
Applied
case
explanatory
model-construction
in
epistemic
community,
yields
general
EP-explanation.
Section
3.4
examines
normative
grounds
account,
setting
stage
Part
II.
final
section
integrates
activity
Chapter
2,
yielding
full
particularism
3.5).
Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 194 - 240
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
chapter
builds
on
the
results
of
Chapter
5.
Minimal
coherence
requirements
for
bridging
models
entail
that
main
obstacle
to
IDE
is
scientists’
own
attitudes.
Section
6.1
addresses
this
obstacle,
offering
detailed
guidelines
making
explicit
and
fostering
relations.
These
operationalize
modeling
framework
social
action
norms
from
Part
I.
Following
them
encourages
scientists
engaged
in
IDR
adopt
collaborative
attitudes
toward
explanation.
could
be
fruitfully
applied
current
projects.
6.2
examines
epistemic
benefits
broader
normative
significance
IDE,
focusing
understanding.
yields
a
particularist
account
an
important
aspect
scientific
understanding,
building
earlier
sections
book.
Other
implications
build
ideal
patchwork
unity
science
6.3
puts
new,
understanding
conversation
with
other
philosophical
accounts
same.
6.4
concludes,
summarizing
key
II.
Oxford University Press eBooks,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown, P. 153 - 193
Published: April 1, 2025
Abstract
This
chapter
applies
the
framework
from
Part
I
to
interdisciplinary
explanation
(IDE),
continuing
argument
Chapter
4.
first
reprise
social
action
framework,
then
apply
it
late-stage
low-degree
IDE
(Section
5.1).
Section
5.2
explicates
three-layer
structure
of
collective
intention
for
this
case.
The
result
is
a
set
coherence
requirements
IDE,
analogous
norms
collaborating
agents.
titular
bridge
affords
mutual
relation
between
models
contributed
by
different
specializations.
New
elements
comprising
bridge,
spanning
near
and
far
sides,
reciprocally
connect
in
opposite
directions.
5.3
illustrates
these
with
detailed
example:
array
life
science
concerning
hemoglobin.
example
extends
bridging
account
more
complex,
realistic
projects.
5.4
begins
articulate
epistemic
significance
models,
task
continued
6.
5.5
concludes
summary
results
so
far.
