Batterman, Robert (2004) Response to Belot's "Whose Devil? Which Details?". [Preprint]

Preview

PDF wdwd.pdf Download (104kB)

Abstract

I respond to Belot's argument and defend the view that sometimes "fundamental" are explanatorily inadequate and need to be supplemented with certain aspects of less fundamental "theories emeritus."

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Batterman, Robert
Commentary on:	Belot, Gordon (2003) Whose Devil? Which Details? [Preprint]
Keywords:	Explanation, Asymptotics, Intertheoretic Relations
Subjects:	General Issues > Models and Idealization General Issues > Explanation Specific Sciences > Physics
Depositing User:	rbatterm rbatterm rbatterm
Date Deposited:	18 Feb 2004
Last Modified:	07 Oct 2010 15:12
Item ID:	1623
Subjects:	General Issues > Models and Idealization General Issues > Explanation Specific Sciences > Physics
Date:	February 2004
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/1623

Commentary/Response Threads

• Belot, Gordon Whose Devil? Which Details? (deposited 14 Dec 2003)
  • Batterman, Robert Response to Belot's "Whose Devil? Which Details?". (deposited 18 Feb 2004) [Currently Displayed]
    • Kallfelz, William Contracting Batterman's Asymptotic 'No-Man's Land:' Reduction Rejoins Explanation. (deposited 15 Aug 2005)
    • Cohnitz, Daniel Explanations are like salted peanuts. Why you can't cut the route toward further reduction. (deposited 30 Mar 2004)

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item