The history of philosophy is to a great extent that of a certain clash of human temperaments…. Of whatever temperament a professional philosopher is, he tries when philosophizing to sink the fact of his temperament.
...Most of us have, of course, no very definite intellectual temperament, we are a mixture of opposite ingredients, each one present very moderately.
...Temperaments with their cravings and refusals do determine men in their philosophies, and always will.
― William James
When a curiosity in the world draws your eye, and your mind begs for an explanation ― what kind of explanation do you offer it? Every effect is driven by an infinitude of causes, and each cause among them is driven in turn by yet another infinitude. Picking apart this vast interconnected web, we can see four kinds of explanatory strands, four kinds of relations which might satisfy your mind’s quest to understand.
Each of these kinds of explanations lives in its own world; communicating between these kinds is quite difficult. Much frustration might arise when we ask for an explanation, expecting some human-centric story of motivation, and instead are given some story of chemicals or atoms, or vice versa. These explanations are tools, and as tools are useful for different kinds of things. Depending on the problems we try to solve in our daily lives, we might tend towards one kind of explanations more than others, or perhaps we might tend towards one kind because of our personality, or perhaps because of some random synaptic connection in the brain…