HowAndWhyQuestions

Responding to AtomismAndHolism :

I like this a lot, but it feels to me like there is some other factor here that's missing. I could well be barking up the wrong tree here. But ...

Take, for example, two 'theories of change' that explain why cars turn corners.

One, H, would look at the physics of the forces between the wheels and the road that explain how some of the forward energy is converted into sidewards energy that rotates the car .. or whatever ..etc..etc..

The other, W, would look at how humans have designed roads with corners and generally find that it's better to turn the corner following the road than to go in straight lines.

One is an explanation, H, is in terms of 'how' and the other, W, is in terms of 'why'. Both could be formalised (probably) in terms of a model with variables, but their approach to explanation is different.

I'd be tempted to say that the H theory, as an essentially reductionist description of physical processes, was the atomist theory. Whereas, the W theory is more like an holistic explanation. The difference is that one looks 'inside' the thing to explain the phenomenum in terms of components - atoms - whereas the other looks 'outside' the thing to explain the phenomenum in terms of relationships with other things. Neither do enough to explain everything about why and how cars turn corners - but both have variables.

– OliSharpe

See also TypesOfExplanation