Paragraph about Chemical equation software
While the explanandum of a DN or DS explanation can be deduced from the explanans, one cannot deduce that some particular individual, John Jones, has recovered from the above statistical law and the information Chemical equation that he has taken penicillin. At most what can be deduced from this information is that recovery is more or less probable. In IS explanation, the relation between explanans and explanandum is, in Hempel's words, “inductive,” rather than deductive — hence the name inductive-statistical explanation. The details of Hempel's account are complex, but the underlying idea is roughly this: an IS Ufology explanation will be good or successful to the extent that its explanans confers high probability on its explanandum outcome.
Why suppose that all (or even some) explanations have a DN or IS structure? There are two ideas which play a central motivating role in Hempel's (1965) discussion. The first connects the information provided by a DN argument with a certain conception of what it is to achieve understanding of why something happens — it appeals to an idea about the object or point of giving an explanation. Hempel writes
LaTeX equation editor