# Explanation and Human Action By A. R. Louch **URL:** **By** Tibor Machan **Published:** March 1, 1974 --- “With philosophy's inclination towards piecemeal work and the fear or distaste of truly philosophical systems, science has been left to grope for basic principles all on its own.” With philosophy's inclination towards piecemeal work and the fear or distaste of truly philosophical systems, science has been left to grope for basic principles all on its own. This is the accomplishment of David Hume and his contemporary imitators. But matters are looking up a bit. The question of how to do careful, rational investigations within the humane sciences is no longer answered with a loud demand to "be like physics." And while B. F. Skinner and many other amateur philosophers will adopt the neo-Humean or positivist approach to the philosophy of science, some philosophers have finally broken away from the unquestioned conservatism of recent years, although one would not yet call this a "trend." Nor are these philosophers of science Marxists or Existentialists. What we are witnessing is a revival of Aristotelianism in the philosophy of science. A. R. Louch has written an amazing book. What he gives us is a hard-line rejection of all the nonsense about the social sciences having to copy physics and chemistry—without declaring that the universe makes no sense where human affairs are concerned. "'Behaviourial scientists' (i.e. psychologists and social scientists) and philosophers have put obstacles in the way of ad hoc explanations by demanding that any explanation lean on generalities for its support. When these demands of philosophers of science or 'methodologists' are taken seriously, as they are very frequently by psychologists and sociologists, theories are developed which meet the formal requisite of generality, but which pay the price for it rather heavily. For these theories are often redundant and platitudinous or totally irrelevant to the behavior they are designed to explain." From this critical perspective Louch sets out to shed light on the nature of sociology, psychology, political science, economics and other sciences which claim to render the nature of man, his institutions and his behavior understandable. Louch provides a long awaited challenge to the dubious monopoly which behaviorism claims to have on treating man scientifically. He considers such crucial topics as desires, needs, pleasure and pain, emotions, and provides a theoretical framework within which the phenomena of intentions, purposes, motives and other mental activities may be understood. Louch spends an entire chapter on the subject of man's consciousness and defends man's mind not as some supernatural aspect of man but as something that is required to make the existence of human life intelligible. But the most challenging and powerful idea which Louch puts forth in _Explanation and Human Action_ is the view of man as an agent whose actions cannot be understood without acknowledging his moral nature. "Explanation of human action is moral explanation. In appealing to reasons for acting, motives, purposes, intentions, desires and their cognates, which occur in both ordinary and technical discussions of human doings, we exhibit an action in the light of circumstances that are taken to entitle or warrant a person to act as he does." This revitalization of the Aristotelian line of human investigation is indeed welcome. Louch's work has unfortunately been largely ignored by the journals. But good works do not always catch on quickly. If they did, then we probably would not need them so desperately. Nonetheless, it is encouraging to report that a work with such revolutionary ideas—given the general intellectual atmosphere—has been published by the University of California Press. Any serious inquirer into human affairs and the relationship of the study of man to science in general ought to investigate Louch's book carefully. I can promise a very rewarding journey. _Reviewed by Tibor R. Machan / Philosophy (244 Pages, Indexed) / BFL Price $2.65_