Fallacies of Explanation
An explanation is a form of reasoning which attempts to answer the question "why?" For example, it is with an explanation that we answer questions such as, "Why is the sky blue?" Explanation can be based on a scientific theory, on agency, or purpose (teleology). In this case, the explanation of why the sky is blue might begin in terms of the composition of the sky and theories of reflection. Of course, blue, as we commonly refer to it, does not refer to a wavelength of light but to that color we see in our mind's eye (qualia) when we look at the sky, a blueberry, or iodine. And the phenomenelogical answer to why the sky appears blue to our minds will be of a different sort. If one is open to the idea that the universe was created or designed for a purpose or with intentionality, one might also venture an answer in terms of teological or aesthetics.
The theory advanced to explain why some phenomen occurs cannot be tested. We test a theory by means of its predictions. For example, a theory may predict that light bends under certain conditions, or that a liquid will change colour if sprayed with acid, or that a psychotic person will respond badly to particular stimuli. If the predicted event fails to occur, then this is evidence against the theory. A thoery cannot be tested when it makes no predictions. It is also untestable when it predicts events which would occur whether or not the theory were true.