Guidelines for Inference to the Best Explanation Portfolio

In this assignment, you will come up with 3 original examples of cogent Inference to the Best Explanation arguments, in order to show that you know how to use them correctly.

Make sure that the content of the arguments is as different from one another as possible, that each of the arguments uses a different type of explanation (i.e., causal, teleological, interpretive, procedural), and that one of them is interpretive.

1. For the title of each argument, indicate the type of explanation that it uses.

2. In the First premise, describe the phenomenon to be explained and provide an exhaustive list of the possible explanations that includes at least three explanations. (The phenomenon doesn’t have to be an actual case, but it should be based an a real life example. Make sure the explanations are clear, intelligible, and distinct.)

3. In the Second premise, list any explanations with internal or external inconsistencies, describe the inconsistencies, and eliminate the explanations from consideration. If there aren’t any, skip this premise. But at least one of your arguments should include an explanation with an inconsistency.

4. In the Third premise, list any advantages the remaining explanations have over one another in terms of the criteria of adequacy and the amount of evidence supporting them, and indicate which explanation has the greatest overall advantages. Each argument should include this premise, and should use at least one of the criteria of adequacy to contrast the remaining explanations.

5. Make sure all of the competing explanations are mentioned in either the Second or the Third premises, and that your claims about them make sense.

6. When you have completed a draft of your portfolio, double check your grammar and spelling, the formatting of the paper, and each item on the checklist below. Then write or type the following signing statement and sign your name: “I have carefully read and followed the guidelines and thoroughly edited my paper for grammar, spelling, and formatting.”

Examples:

Causal

1. Crop circles are either caused by genetic defects in some of the plants, by extraterrestrials, or by pranksters.

2. The genetic defects explanation is externally inconsistent with laboratory tests of the plants.

3. The prankster explanation is simpler, more fruitful and conservative than the extraterrestrial explanation.

4. Therefore, the prankster explanation is probably the best explanation of crop circles.

Teleological

1. That student is running down the hallway either because he is trying to escape from a psychopathic murderer, he is late to class, or he is trying to exercise.

2. The psychopathic murderer explanation is externally inconsistent because there is no one chasing after the student.

3. The tardiness explanation is more conservative than the exercise explanation because a hallway isn’t a normal place for someone to exercise.

4. Therefore, the tardiness explanation is probably the best explanation for the student running down the hallway.

Interpretive

1. When Mary said that she likes my new shoes, she was either being truthful, being sarcastic, or merely being polite.

2. The politeness interpretation is externally inconsistent because Mary has a reputation for speaking her mind and never restrains herself out of politeness.

3. Although the truthfulness interpretation would be a simpler explanation, the sneering tone of Mary’s voice provides substantial evidence that she was intending to be sarcastic.

4. Therefore, the sarcasm interpretation is probably the best explanation of the meaning of Mary’s comment.

Procedural

1. The bank was robbed late last night, and it was either robbed by two people (one person outside interfering with the alarm system and one person climbing a ladder and crawling into the building through a vent), by a group of acrobats (same as the previous explanation, but with a group of people standing on each other’s shoulders instead of a ladder), or a single person.

2. The single robber explanation is internally inconsistent because it would require the robber to be both inside and outside the building at the same time.

3. The acrobat explanation is somewhat more fruitful (because it more specifically describes the robbers), but it is much less simple and conservative than the two robber explanation.

4. Therefore, the two robber explanation is probably the best explanation of bank robbery.

General Form of an Inference to the Best Explanation:

1. Describe the phenomenon to be explained and provide an exhaustive list of possible explanations. (Include at least 3 competing explanations.)

2. List any explanations with internal or external inconsistencies, and eliminate them from consideration. (If there aren’t any, skip this premise.)

3. List any advantages the remaining explanations have over one another in terms of the criteria of adequacy and the amount of evidence supporting them, and indicate which explanation has the greatest overall advantages.

4. Therefore, the explanation with the greatest advantages is probably the best explanation of the phenomenon.

Grammar and Spelling: Make sure that your papers are clearly written – i.e., that the meaning is clear enough that any other student would be able to understand it. Papers will be downgraded for spelling, grammatical, and stylistic errors if there are more than 2 per page.

Sources: You shouldn’t use any outside sources since your arguments are supposed to be original.

Format: Typed, 12 point type, 1-1.5 inch margins, number and staple pages if more than one page. Include a title and make sure that the parts of the portfolio are neatly arranged

Checklist

A. Name – Above each argument, indicate the type of explanation that it uses.

B. Originality and Diversity – None of the arguments should use examples that were used in class, in our textbook, or that you found in some other source like the Internet. Also, the content of each argument should be as different as possible from the others.

C. List of Potential Explanations – Is the list of potential explanations in the First premise exhaustive? Did you include at least three of them?

D. Three Different Types of Explanations, including Interpretive – Did you use a different type of explanation in each argument? Does one of the arguments use interpretive explanations?

E. Inconsistency Premise – Does at least one of your arguments contain an inconsistency premise? Do you clearly describe the inconsistency in the explanation?

F. Criteria of Adequacy – Do all of your arguments compare explanations using at least one of the criteria of adequacy?

G. All Explanations are Dealt with – Are all of the competing explanations mentioned in either the Second or the Third premises? Do your claims about them make sense?

H. Inductive – Did you include the word ‘probably’ or a synonym in the Conclusion in order to indicate that this is an inductive argument?

I. Number both Premises and the Conclusion – Is each premise and conclusion in an argument numbered and on a separate line, and does the conclusion should start with ‘Therefore …’?