Explanatory knowledge

Explanatory knowledge is information that explains why things are so or why certain effects will happen. Here is where it is possible to determine the direction of the solution. Examples the way Bt proteins affect specific pest and beneficial insects what are the main reasons for unwelcome erosion effects mechanisms of vertical gene flow mechanisms of resistance development. 

Solving practical problems such as the development of sustainable transgenic crops cannot be dealt with by making the planning process more science-based. Dealing with wicked problems is always political because of its deontic premises. Science only generates factual, instrumental and in the best cases, explanatory knowledge. 

This is the framework of methodologies that can be used to conduct legitimate enquiries in a subject, meaning those which lead to the production of acceptable scientific knowledge. The natures of each of the types within the representational triplet and their relationships to each other provide an explanatory framework in respect of all chemical phenomena. The macro and submicro types of representation do so for the Group A curriculum at the desired qualitative level, whilst the addition of the symbolic type completes the scope of chemical explanation in the Group B curriculum. 

The science of medicines is a theoretical, i.e., explanatory, one. It is to provide us with knowledge by which our judgement about the utility of medicines can be validated at the bedside. ... 

The interindividual variability reflects differences in the extent of exposure, in toxicokinetics as well as in toxicodynamics. The variability due to factors which influence the extent of exposure (physiological differences in the intake, e.g., inhalation rates) can be considered by means of suitable parameters for the internal exposure (absorbed dose, area under the curve AUC, plasma concentration) if sufficient information is available. With respect to toxicokinetic factors, interindi-vidual differences in the metabolism of chemicals are generally considered as the most significant explanatory factor. Hardly any knowledge is available with respect to the factors that influence toxicodynamics. In the following, a brief overview of the factors playing a role for the toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic differences is presented. 

A compound of the empirical composition FClgOg was claimed by DeGuevara (79). The following self-explanatory abstract of this patent was found in Chemical Abstracts and, we are confident, will be enjoyed by the more knowledgeable readers ... 

Explanatory figures and tables supplement the text and clarify difficult concepts. Extensive references provide gateways to more focused study. Suitable for undergraduates or new practitioners interested in improving their knowledge on the current status and future trends of HPLC, the book is also a critical resource for researchers looking for solutions to complex separation problems or those who currently use HPLC as either an analytical or a preparative scale tool. 

Lucidity. The authors have found students who understand advanced courses in quantum mechanics but find difficulty in comprehending a field at whose center lies the quantum mechanics of electron transitions across interfaces. The difficulty is associated, perhaps, with the interdisciplinary character of the material a background knowledge of physical chemistiy is not enough. Material has therefore sometimes been presented in several ways and occasionally the same explanations are repeated in different parts of the book. The language has been made informal and highly explanatory. It retains, sometimes, the lecture style. In this respect, the authors have been influenced by The Feynman Lectures on Physics. 

We assume the reader is familiar with vector notation, which is covered in many texts (e.g., Ref. 1), and except for brief explanatory comments, no summary of vector operation is presented. However, the tabulated components of the balance equations in various coordinate systems presented in this chapter should enable the reader to apply them without any detailed knowledge of vector operations. 

At first sight, this poses a fatal dilemma for internal realism. On the first hom of the dilemma we face organizational metaphysical realism. It claims that there are numerous conceptual schemes and they do not simply copy the structure of reality. Such copying would not even be possible, since we do not have direct access to that inherent structure. Rather, the human mind actively projects structures into reality it introduces distinctions, sets up similarity relations, etc. However, there are external constraints on the construction of conceptual schemes, and these constraints are afforded by the inherent structure of reality. Some schemes cut at the joints more often than the others. Failures to cut at the joints are manifested in bad or inaccurate predictions, lack of explanatory power, repeated failures, etc. This view does provide the external constraints necessary for the objectivity of knowledge, and also makes room for the active organizing role of the intellect. But the price is... 

In attempt to handle uncertainties and unknowns, Tlieodore has proposed a modified version of the standard Delplii panel approach that the autliors have modestly defined as the FLTA (an acronym for tlie Flynn-Tlieodore Approach)." In order to generate "better estimates, several knowledgeable individuals within and perhaps outside tlie organization are asked to independently provide estimates, with explanatory details on tliese estimates. Each individutil in the panel is then allowed to independently rev iew all responses. Tlie cycle is then repeated until the group s responses approach convergence. 

Structure, for the outside investigator, are hypothesized explanatory entities based on experiential, behavioral, or psychological data. They are also hypothesized explanatory concepts for each of us in looking at his own experience I know that fourteen divided by two equals seven, but I do not experience the arithmetical skills structure directly I only know that when I need that kind of knowledge, it appears and functions. Since I need not hold on consciously to that knowledge all the time, I readily believe or hypothesize that it is stored in some kind of structure, someplace "in" my mind. 

Yet typically Marx does not emphasize this motivation. His general attitude is better summed up when he says that "capital does not create science, but exploits il". There occurs a growth in non-patentable knowledge on which capital can draw, without being instrumental in creating it. Hence it is also doubtful whether science can satisfy the explanatory constraint. It is inherently implausible to suggest that the private ownership of the means of production can be explained by its impact on the development of non-ownable productive forces. True, Marx emphasizes that the historical task of capitalism is to create/rcc time in which a minority can devote themselves to artistic and scientific activities that will lay the foundations for the society of the future (2.4.2), but he no-... 

It is, however, self-explanatory that the human brain can only discover cognizable reality, understand natural laws, and make a use of this knowledge, but cannot create a world. In the center of the Mystic Lamb, the famous triptych painted by the van Eyck brothers before 1432, God the Almighty is a regally dressed, charming and attractive man who holds the insignia of power in his hands and has an admirable crown at his feet. The viewer is still shocked by the apocalyptic visions of Hieronymus Bosch. We meet in his paintings thousands and thousands of nonexistent creatures and objects. 

---