DISPOSITIONS AND SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION

Abstract

Some have held that dispositional claims play no role in scientific explanations of the manifestations of those dispositions, save as placeholders for categorical claims. Others have contended that explanations can appeal to dispositional claims and even that all properties science discusses are dispositional. I adjudicate this dispute. I criticize the standard means of distinguishing dispositional from categorical claims by their relation to counterfactuals. I then refine this approach by exploiting the relation of dispositions to natural laws. This proposal, combined with a counterfactual account of scientific explanation (which I explore), suggests "why" dispositional claims are otiose in certain scientific explanations.