This chapter contrasts the theory of singular compositional abduction with Peter Lipton’s picture of inference to the best explanation. Where Lipton does intend his theory to apply to the scientific interpretation of experimental results, his approach does not involve extensive close reading of scientific experimental work. Moreover, where Lipton relies heavily on early work on contrastive explanation, this chapter argues that that account has limited applicability. It also indicates how his brief account of explanatory virtues have little to offer when it comes to abductive inferences from individual experimental results.

This chapter introduces the book’s project: relying extensively on the work of Alan Hodgkin and Alan Huxley on the confirmation of the role of sodium ions in generating the action potential, the book develops an account of singular compositional abduction. The first part of the book sets out the “science-first” methodological approach along with the positive theory of singular compositional abduction. The second part provides two cases studies of singular compositional abduction: The experimental work Hodgkin and Huxley used to support their theory of the action potential and some of the experimental work that has been brought to bear in attempts to understand the biological basis of the Hermann grid illusion. The third part contrasts the theory of singular compositional abduction with Peircean theories of abduction, Harman’s approach to inference to the best explanation, Lipton’s approach to inference to the best explanation, and the New Mechanist “matched interlevel experimental” approach.