Assessing Relative Causal Importance in History
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4496469 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Andrus Pork (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1985 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 62 |
| Publication date | 1985-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | History and Theory (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0018-2656 • E-ISSN: 1468-2303 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2504943 |
| OpenAlex | W2322504802 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
The competing explanations of historians have recently attracted the attention of philosophers of history in the English-speaking world. Examples are W. H. Dray's writings, especially his analysis of causation in A. J. P. Taylor's account of the Second World War;1 Alan Donagan's model of verifying alternative historical explanations;2 and M. Hammond's article about weighting causes in historical explanation.3 The best analysis seems to be that of Raymond Martin, who has done a good job in clarifying many key questions.4 He writes
Econometrics · Economics · Epistemology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · History · Philosophy · Philosophy, History, and Historiography · Political Science Research and Education
| Citations per year | 0.05 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1989 - 2013 (25) |
| Highly cited | No |