Menu
Home
People
Places
Arts
History
Plants & Animals
Science
Life & Culture
Technology
Reference.org
Explanatory power
open-in-new
<h2 id="examples">Examples</h2> <p>Deutsch takes examples from <a href="/facts/Greek_mythology/M7k4FvW8">Greek mythology</a>. He describes how very specific, and even somewhat falsifiable theories were provided to explain how the god <a href="/facts/Demeter/msJN4G3H">Demeter</a>'s sadness caused the seasons. Alternatively, Deutsch points out, one could have just as easily explained the seasons as resulting from the god's happiness, which would make it a poor explanation because it is so easy to arbitrarily change details.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:1" href="#fn:1"><sup>1</sup></a> Without Deutsch's criterion, the 'Greek gods explanation' could have just kept adding justifications. The same criterion, of being "hard to vary", may be what makes the modern explanation for the <a href="/facts/Seasons/20vCqJWN">seasons</a> a good one. None of the details about the Earth rotating around the Sun at a certain angle in a certain orbit can be easily modified without changing the theory's coherence.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:2" href="#fn:2"><sup>2</sup></a><a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:3" href="#fn:3"><sup>3</sup></a> </p> <h2 id="relation-to-other-criteria">Relation to other criteria</h2> <p>The philosopher Karl Popper acknowledged it is logically possible to avoid falsification of a hypothesis by changing details to avoid any criticism, adopting the term an <i>immunizing stratagem</i> from <a href="/facts/Hans_Albert/rho5X4eU">Hans Albert</a>.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:4" href="#fn:4"><sup>4</sup></a> Popper argued that scientific hypotheses should be subjected to methodological testing to select for the strongest hypothesis.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:5" href="#fn:5"><sup>5</sup></a> </p> <h2 id="see-also">See also</h2> <ul><li><a href="/facts/Falsifiability/IlxN7cYB">Falsifiability</a></li> <li><a href="/facts/Razor_(philosophy)/5a0AwxnK">Razor (philosophy)</a></li> <li><a href="/facts/Critical_rationalism/7L45WKCt">Critical rationalism</a></li></ul> <h2 id="references">References</h2> <ol> <li id="fn:1"><p>David Deutsch, "A new way of explaining explanation" <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain_explanation" target="_blank">http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain_explanation</a> <a href="#fnref:1" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:2"><p>David Deutsch, "A new way of explaining explanation" <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain_explanation" target="_blank">http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain_explanation</a> <a href="#fnref:2" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:3"><p>David Deutsch (2011), The Beginning Of Infinity", ch1, The Reach of Explanations <a href="/wiki/The_Beginning_of_Infinity" target="_blank">/wiki/The_Beginning_of_Infinity</a> <a href="#fnref:3" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:4"><p>Ray S. Percival (2012), The Myth of the Closed Mind: Explaining why and how People are Rational, p.206, Chicago. <a href="#fnref:4" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:5"><p>Karl R. Popper (1934), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, p.20, Routledge Classics (ed. 2004) <a href="#fnref:5" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> </ol>