Explanation and Explanationism in Science and Metaphysics

Abstract

Contemporary metaphysics is heavily concerned with its methodology and epistemic status. This is for a good reason: in the virtual absence of experiments, predictions, and empirical feedback, it is far from clear how metaphysical theories and views can be rationally justified. These ‘meta-level’ issues are notoriously as impenetrable as they are important, alas. We can make the task more manageable by focusing on the role and status of explanatory considerations in metaphysics. Explanatory arguments and inference to the best explanation play a central, perhaps foundational role in metaphysics. The ‘explanationist’ methodology, although far from being universally adhered to, is widespread and commonly adopted in one form or another. While the notion of metaphysical explanation remains murky and nebulous, and while some have expressed qualms about inference to the best explanation altogether, explanationism has been bravely defended by others. I will argue that these vindications of explanationism in metaphysics turn out to be superficial and vexed, especially in their affiliation to explanationism in science. Even if we grant the legitimacy to explanationism in