Bodies fall because of the gravitational pull of the Earth; Dinosaurs died out because of a large asteroid; the Sun emits heat because it fuzes hydrogen into helium. These are scientific explanations. Compare these with the following cases: grass is green or horses are cabbages because grass is green; ‘the Mona Lisa is a painting’ is true because the Mona Lisa is a painting; and the singleton set of Socrates exists because Socrates the philosopher does (or did). These, too, are explanations, but they are not the kind of explanation that are usually given by scientists. Instead, philosophers came to call them metaphysical explanations. While scientific explanation has been a much-discussed topic in the last 70 years, metaphysical explanation is a relatively recent subject of philosophical inquiry. Moreover, most theorizing about metaphysical explanation has been taking place in isolation from the scientific explanation literature. In this class, we will try to bridge this gap and explore connections between the two issues. Possible topics to be covered include the role of causation and other explanatory relations, the connection between explanation and understanding, the predictive role of explanations, and realism and antirealism about explanation.

Pre-requisites: Any class in metaphysics, philosophy of science, epistemology, or history of analytic philosophy. If you didn’t take any such class, consult me.

Assessment: a final paper

Grade components: 65% exam, 35% attendance and participation