@article {13486,
	title = {Je Eulerova explan{\'a}cia nemo{\v z}nosti prechodu kr{\'a}{\v l}oveck{\'y}ch mostov symetrick{\'a} alebo asymetrick{\'a}?},
	journal = {Filozofia},
	volume = {77},
	number = {7},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {531 - 544},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {In this article I will focus on the analysis of a scientific explanation of an empirical event that has at least three different incompatible interpretations / reconstructions. This example in philosophical and scientific literature is known as Euler{\textquoteright}s explanation. However, this work will only follow the differences between Reutlinger{\textquoteright}s and Lange{\textquoteright}s and Woodward's reconstruction. The paper attempts to show that Euler{\textquoteright}s explanation can only by reconstructed as an asymmetric non-causal explanation. It does so with the help of Lange{\textquoteright}s and Woodward{\textquoteright}s main key ideas of their theories of explanation. Subsequently these ideas are put up against Reutlinger{\textquoteright}s conclusion that Euler{\textquoteright}s explanation constitutes a symmetric non-causal explanation. In the end the paper argues that ultimately this is a wrong conclusion because Reutlinger{\textquoteright}s account omitted certain aspects of Euler{\textquoteright}s explanation.},
	keywords = {Counterfactual theory of explanation, Distinctive mathematical explanation, Euler{\textquoteright}s explanation, Explanation priority, Non-causal explanation, Scientific law},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.7.4},
	url = {https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/09171430filozofia.2022.77.7.4.pdf},
	author = {Makovn{\'\i}k, Dalibor}
}
