Abstract

When motivational explanations are cast in the Hempelian form, motivations and other mental states usually play the role of antecedent conditions. This leads to two objections: (1) that there is a question-begging connection between the explanandum and the antecedent conditions referring to mental states, and (2) that the intentional character of motivational explanations prevents them from being scientifically useful. These objections are mooted if claims about motivational states are construed as covering laws rather than as statements of antecedent conditions are as covering laws rather than as statements of antecedent conditions.