@article {924987,
	title = {Causation, unification and the adequacy of explanations of facts},
	journal = {Theoria},
	volume = {24},
	number = {3},
	year = {2009},
	pages = {301{\textendash}320},
	abstract = {<p>Pluralism with respect to the structure of explanations of facts is not uncommon. Wesley Salmon, for instance, distinguished two types of explanation: causal explanations (which provide insight in the causes of the fact we want to explain) and unification explanations (which fit the explanandum into a unified world view). The pluralism which Salmon and others have defended is compatible with several positions about the exact relation between these two types of explanations. We distinguish four such positions, and argue in favour of one of them. We also compare our results with the views of some authors who have recently written on this subject.</p>},
	issn = {0495-4548},
	doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1387/theoria.698},
	author = {Weber, Erik and Van Bouwel, Jeroen}
}
@article {334981,
	title = {Coping with inconsistencies: {E}xamples from the social sciences},
	journal = {Logic and logical philosophy},
	volume = {14},
	year = {2005},
	pages = {89{\textendash}101},
	abstract = {<p>In this paper we present two case studies on inconsistencies in the social sciences. The first is devoted to sociologist George Caspar Homans and his exchange theory. We argue that his account of how he arrived at his theory is highly misleading, because it ignores the inconsistencies he had to cope with. In the second case study we analyse how John Maynard Keynes coped with the inconsistency between classical economic theory and real economic conditions in developing his path-breaking theory.</p>},
	issn = {1425-3305},
	author = {Weber, Erik and Van Bouwel, Jeroen}
}
@conference {382092,
	title = {The consequences of scientific pluralism for science policy},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of V Jornadas Latinoamericanas de estudios sociales de la ciencia y de la tecnolog{\'\i}a},
	year = {2004},
	author = {Van Bouwel, Jeroen}
}
