1. Briefly describe Carl Hempel’s influential “covering-law” model of explanation. 2. Explain the “flagpole” example. What does it mean when the author says that “explanation isn’t... 1. Briefly describe Carl Hempel’s influential “covering-law” model of explanation. 2. Explain the “flagpole” example. What does it mean when the author says that “explanation isn’t symmetrical?” 3. What is the problem that the flagpole example reveals for Hempel’s view? 4. What is the difference between realism and anti-realism? Do anti-realists think theories don’t need to be true? 5. Briefly explain the problem of underdetermination. 6. Why do realists often turn to arguments like the “no miracles” argument? Briefly explain how no-miracles arguments work. 7. What does the term “theory-ladenness” of data mean? Give an example. Read more

1. Covering-law model explains by subsuming events under general laws. 2. Flagpole example shows explanation asymmetry. 3. It challenges Hempel's model symmetry. 4. Realism represents truth; anti-realism sees theories as constructs. 5. Underdetermination suggests theories aren't determined by data. 6. No-miracles argument supports realism by explaining prediction success. 7. Theory-ladenness means data is influenced by theoretical biases.

Here are the brief descriptions and explanations based on the provided questions:

1. Carl Hempel’s “covering-law” model: Hempel's model suggests that scientific explanations function by subsuming individual events under general laws. This means that to explain something is to show that it can be logically derived from general laws and specific conditions.

2. The “flagpole” example: The flagpole example questions Hempel’s symmetry of explanation by illustrating that the height of the flagpole and the shadow length can be used to calculate each other, but the explanation should go in the direction of flagpole height causing shadow length, and not vice versa.

3. Problem with the flagpole example: The example reveals that explanations might not necessarily be symmetrical as Hempel's model suggests, since knowing the shadow length does not causally explain the height of the flagpole.

4. Realism vs. Anti-realism: Realism holds that theories represent reality and are true, while anti-realism denies this, viewing theories as useful constructs regardless of their truth. Anti-realists do not necessarily believe theories need to be true.

5. Underdetermination: The problem of underdetermination suggests that for a set of data, multiple scientific theories can be formed, all of which are equally supported by the data. This questions whether empirical data alone can determine which theory is true.

6. “No miracles” argument: This argument posits that the success of science in predicting phenomena is best explained by the truth of scientific theories, instead of attributing this success to mere coincidence or 'miracles'.

7. “Theory-ladenness” of data: This concept implies that observations are influenced by the theoretical framework from which they are viewed. For example, the same experimental results might be interpreted differently within the framework of different theories.