In the process of labor relations in commercial or government institutions, an explanatory note is often drawn up, what is employee's explanatory note its definition, types, sample, we will consider in today's topic.

An explanatory note is an explanatory document that describes other provisions of the main document (draft, report, plan) or explains the reasons for a particular act, fact or event. Although the current law does not provide an established definition of what an employee's explanatory note is.

As a rule, the initiator of writing this document is the head of the company, law enforcement agencies or the security service. Such actions have a legal basis, which obliges employers to require in some situations a written explanation from workers about the act they have done (TC article No. 408, 199).

Considered in general, then preparation of an explanatory note, is considered non-normative documentation that can explain the reasons for an action or condition, any inaction, an occurrence or the occurrence of a certain event. It is compiled by an employee of the enterprise, and is provided to the manager or a person with a higher position.

According to the constitution, the execution of an explanatory note is the right of any employee, and not an obligation. At the same time, the employer is obliged to require the preparation of this document (in writing):

Before the entry into force of a disciplinary sanction (TC Article No. 199);
until an order is issued, which will concern the recovery of a certain amount of money from the employee's salary (TC article No. 408).

In other cases, the employer has the right, but is not at all obliged to require employees to provide explanations (in order to find out the position of the company employee in any situation or for a general assessment of the reasons for the actions taken, or for making some kind of decision).

Types of explanatory notes

There are the following types of explanatory notes, which are divided into:

Exculpatory, when the note contains the reasons for inaction or wrong action.
Explanatory, when an employee of an organization explains the actions of other persons, describes the circumstances or conditions of certain events that have occurred for reasons beyond his control.

As a rule, explanatory concerns the consideration of the following aspects:

absenteeism or absenteeism at the workplace at the appointed time;
Staying at work in a state of intoxication or any other nature (alcoholic, narcotic);
being late;
Violation of the requirements and norms of labor protection;
Theft of someone else's property, if the theft occurred at the workplace;
immoral act;
Providing false information to various authorities;
Violation of labor discipline;
Incomplete or poor performance of duties.

Sample explanatory note of an employee and drafting rules

This note is drawn up on a sheet of A4 paper exclusively individually in a single copy.

Some enterprises use a specially established uniform for their personnel. Despite the fact that the established form is only advisory in nature, the approval of its version is carried out with the help of a local regulatory legal act.

But, despite this, the document must carry several parts:

Actual(you must indicate in the appropriate field all the facts that served as the reason for considering this issue);
Causal(reasons that fully explain the situation that occurred are given and recorded in detail);

Each should, from an objective point of view, reflect all the facts given that testify in your favor.

Compared with a memorandum, it may provide for the absence of a logical part in which conclusions are written.

In addition to what we have already written in the note, the following should be displayed:

The exact name of the organization where the employee operates;
The place where the document was drawn up;
Information that reasonably provides information about the recipient;
The exact name of the document;
date of writing;
Registration number;
At the end of the note, a signature is required.

There are situations in which an employee may refuse to write a note in connection with various events that are both legal and illegal. If, with the employee’s legal refusal to draw up a note, it is drawn up that displays all the available witnesses. There must be more than two witnesses. The obligatory act shall indicate all the circumstances of the current situation, according to which these disagreements occurred. Displays personal and contact information of witnesses, place of residence, position, and so on.

You also need to remember that the registration of an explanatory note is carried out in the manner prescribed by the head and no one else.

After reviewing the case materials, your supervisor sets a resolution for the execution of the order. The period of storage of this document in any organization is at least three years.

Perhaps these are all the main points that properly describe what an employee's explanatory note is, its definition, types and samples of documentation.

in the methodology of science) is a cognitive procedure aimed at enriching and deepening knowledge about the phenomena of the real world by including these phenomena in the structure of certain connections, relationships and dependencies, which makes it possible to reveal the essential features of this phenomenon. In the simplest case, separate empirically fixed facts are the subject of explanation. In this case, the explanation is preceded by their description. But in principle, the subject of explanation can be any kind of reality in any of its manifestations and at any level of its expression in the system of scientific knowledge. So, for example, the laws of science, empirical and theoretical, can be explained, the content of theories of a lesser degree of generality can be explained in theories of a more general level, etc. In the structure of explanation as a cognitive procedure, the following elements can be distinguished: 1) initial knowledge about the phenomenon being explained ( so-called explanandum); 2) knowledge used as a condition and means of explanation, allowing to consider the phenomenon being explained in the context of a certain system or structure (the so-called foundations of explanation, or, explanans); 3) cognitive actions that allow applying the knowledge that serves as the basis of explanation to the phenomenon being explained. As the basis for explanation, knowledge of various types and levels of development can be used, which makes it possible to distinguish various types and forms of explanation according to the type of explanance. At the same time, the explanation procedures may differ depending on the cognitive techniques and actions used in the process of their implementation.

In so-called. The standard concept of the analysis of science, put forward by the supporters of logical positivism and widely used in the Western methodology of science in the 40-50s, was dominated by the deductive-nomolopic model of explanation formulated by K. Hempel and P. Oppenheim in 1948 (see: Hempel K. G The Logaka of Explanation, Moscow, 1998, pp. 89-146). This logical model of explanation was the application of the general hypothetico-deductive scheme (see the Lipothetico-deductive method, The hypothetical-deductive model) to the situation of explanation. In this scheme, we proceeded from the consideration of t. and. as an explanance. pomological statements that formulate the laws of science, and as a logical method of explanation, the deduction of knowledge about the phenomenon being explained from these pomological statements was used. The feasibility of such an explanation was considered as a factor of confirmation, justification of the pomological statement (see Justification of the Theory). Like any logical model of a real cognitive process, it had the character of a very strong idealization of it, exaggerating, firstly, the role of the laws of science as an explanance, and secondly, proceeding, like the standard concept of analyzing science as a whole, from the opposition of the context of discovery and context justification, it could not take into account the processes of improving knowledge in the course of the implementation of the explanation procedure. As for the role of the laws of science (the so-called nomological statements) in the processes of explanation, then, indeed, the most developed form of scientific explanation is explanations undertaken on the basis of theoretical laws and involving understanding of the phenomenon being explained in the system of theoretical knowledge, its assimilation in the scientific and theoretical picture of the world.

However, the author of the deductive-nomological model of explanation, K. G. Gempel, was subsequently forced to generalize it, formulating, along with the deductive, probabilistic-inductive or statistical version of the pomological model of explanation. But the main thing is that it would be wrong to underestimate the cognitive and methodological significance of various forms of explanation, the foundations of which are not necessarily the laws of science. T. n. pomological explanations are characteristic of theoretical, mathematized natural science, primarily physics, and in scientific disciplines where theories in the strict sense of the term (see Theory) with their laws are not crystallized, other forms of explanation are common. Thus, in the disciplines of the social and humanitarian profile, typologies often act as the basis for explanation. For example, the explanation of the features of human behavior is given on the basis of the typology of characters in psychology, the explanation of social phenomena - based on the types of social structures and social actions in sociology, etc. The most important role in the sciences of living and inanimate nature, social and humanitarian disciplines is played by explanation by including of the phenomenon under consideration in the context of the systems, structures and connections covering it. This is how causal, genetically evolutionary, functional, structural-systemic, etc. explanations arise, where the explanance is not theories or laws of science, but some categorical schemes and pictures of the world that underlie scientific knowledge in a given subject area, say, an explanation any social or biological phenomena through the establishment of the functions that they perform in a social system or a living organism.

A special problem that caused a lively controversy in the philosophy and methodology of science is related to the explanation of human actions and deeds in various humanitarian disciplines, in history, in the social sciences, where one way or another one has to consider various motivational and semantic attitudes determined by the human mentality as the basis for explanation. In this context, the problem of explanation turns out to be closely related to the problem of understanding in the specific meaning of this term in the tradition coming from Dilthey, in which understanding as the comprehension of the mental prerequisites for the creation of any text or cultural artifact in general is regarded as a specific method of humanitarian knowledge.

From a methodological point of view, the procedures of explanation cannot be reduced to the automatism of deductive conclusions. In itself, bringing phenomena under a general law according to a deductive-nomological scheme presupposes a certain constructive work of consciousness, which Kant called the “ability to judge,” that is, the ability to apply a general rule, a general norm in a particular situation. The real explanation procedures in science, even those that can be represented in the deductive-nomological model, are associated with “building bridges” between the object of explanation and its explanance, clarifying the conditions for the applicability of the general position, finding intermediate links, etc. The search for the foundations of explanation where there is no ready-made knowledge under which the explained phenomena could be summed up, it becomes a powerful stimulus for the development of scientific knowledge, the emergence of new concepts and hypotheses. In particular, the search for explanatory factors is often a prerequisite for theorization of knowledge, the transition from its empirical level to the formation of theoretical concepts, the development of what can be called primary explanatory schemes, which at first represent ad-hoc (i.e., explanations of a given case), but can then be expanded into a theoretical concept. Thus, for example, Durkheim's explanation of a greater number of murders in Protestant communities compared to Catholic ones, a lower degree of social cohesion in the former compared to the latter, which initially acted as an ad-hoc explanation, served as the basis for the creation of the concept of anomie, which was widely recognized in sociology as a cause of social disorganization. . In a situation where attempts to explain certain facts and circumstances within the framework of certain hypotheses, concepts or theories lead to a contradiction with the latter, i.e. real circumstances act in relation to them as counterexamples (see Counterexamples in science), the presence of such counterexamples - for example, the contradiction between the planetary model of the atom and the stability of electrons in orbit becomes a necessary condition for a critical analysis of the relevant knowledge and a stimulus for its revision. This revision by no means always leads to the rejection of this knowledge in the spirit of primitive falsificationism (see Falsification, Falsification), it leads to its clarification, concretization, improvement and development. At the same time, it is desirable that the changes introduced into the theory or hypothesis would not be only ad-hoc explanations of the identified counterexamples, but would increase the explanatory and predictive capabilities of the theory or hypothesis in relation to other facts. The overgrowth of a theory or hypothesis with a large number of ad-hoc explanations is evidence of its weakness.

Thus, the explanation as a whole is a constructive, creative cognitive procedure, as a result of which not only knowledge about the phenomenon being explained is enriched and deepened, but, as a rule, the knowledge used as the basis of explanation is refined and developed. The solution of explanatory problems acts as the most important stimulus for the development of scientific knowledge, its conceptual apparatus, which indicates the failure of a sharp opposition to the so-called. contexts of justification and discovery in the interpretation of explanation within the framework of the standard concept of the analysis of science.

The implementation of the functions of explanation in science is organically linked with prediction and foresight. In essence, considering scientific and cognitive activity as a whole, we can talk about a single explanatory and predictive function of scientific knowledge in relation to its object. Explanation, considered in this context, does not act as a particular cognitive procedure, but as a necessary function of scientific thinking, its cardinal setting .

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

In the presence of a disciplinary or labor offense, the employer has the right to impose disciplinary punishment on the employee, but at the same time, he is obliged to request a written explanation of the situation from the violator. Based on the explanatory note drawn up by the employee, the employer can not only make a decision on punishing the employee, but also assess the severity of his misconduct.

Why is an explanatory note needed?

In the workflow, a lot of various documents are distinguished, among them is an explanatory note. It is used to explain the causes of certain situations, actions or facts. Paper is considered by law as a form of employee self-defense. And it is on the correctness of its compilation, the logic of the presentation of the facts that the subsequent decision of the leadership depends.

Often, an explanatory note is required in the following situations:

• various emergency situations affecting production;
• various violations of labor discipline;
• violation of production discipline;
• various disciplinary offenses;
• misdemeanors.

In particular, most explanatory notes are drawn up due to being late for work or absenteeism, failure to fulfill official obligations. Here is a sample letter of absence from work:

Design rules

Despite the fact that there is still no common unified form for compiling an explanatory note, a number of requirements are put forward for it by the rules of document management:

1. The document is drawn up on a sheet of A4 paper in both handwritten and printed versions.
2. When writing, a strictly business style of presentation of information is used. It is not allowed to use emotionally colored vocabulary when writing a document.
3. Mandatory absence of obscene and colloquial vocabulary.
4. Brief presentation of information. It is not necessary to write a poem on ten pages, rather briefly and to the point state the main points.
5. The document is always written in the first person.
6. In the presentation of the event, logic, a clear chronology, should be visible.
7. There are no final conclusions in the test of the explanatory note. That is, you should not write at the end of the document: "Based on the facts, I consider myself innocent of being late for work."

A correctly drawn up note, which indicates not only the facts that served as its writing, but also weighty arguments in favor of the employee, can mitigate the misconduct, therefore, help, if not to avoid punishment, then at least partially reduce the amount of the fine.

Required details

In the explanatory note, like any other document, a number of details must be indicated. These include:

• name of the organization, structural unit;
• addressee, often the head of the organization;
• the addresser, that is, the direct offender;
• name of the document type;
• registration number. Specified in the personnel department during registration;
• document text;
• date of writing;
• compiler's signature.

When taking into account all the listed details, after writing, a document will be obtained according to the following model:

Text composition

The text of the explanatory note consists of two parts:

1. The factual part, which sets out the facts that have become the reason for writing the document. For example: “June 23, 2016, I didn’t show up for work.”
2. Explanatory, which gives the reasons due to which the situation arose.

Features of dating

The note is dated by the date of its compilation, and not the commission of the offense itself, which is very important. This is due to the fact that within a month after the discovery of the misconduct, not counting the time that the employee was on vacation (on sick leave), it can be applied to him. A correct date of compilation serves as an indication of the date from which the report is kept.

The procedure for compiling a note

When writing any explanatory note, you can follow this order:

1. The position and name of the person to whom you are submitting an explanatory note are indicated in the upper right corner.
2. Under the addressee, the position and name of the compiler are indicated.
3. Below is the name of the document.
4. The main part sets out the facts that led to the situation.
5. At the end of the note is the date of the document and a personal signature.

Attachments to the note

Often appendices are attached to the text of the explanatory note. These can be various kinds of certificates (for example, a certificate issued by a paramedic), acts (for example, an act drawn up by an emergency service during the repair of a water or gas pipeline), a relevant article from the media confirming the fact of an accident, damage to a highway, etc. .

The presence of these papers significantly affects the text of the explanatory note, confirming the facts set forth in it.

Examples of an explanatory note

We suggest that you familiarize yourself with typical examples of an explanatory note.

A note on dereliction of duty:

A note about being late for work:

An explanatory note is drawn up by an employee in the event of a disciplinary or labor violation and serves to protect the employee from the imposition of penalties or their mitigation. Compiled by the employee at the request of the employer on an A4 sheet by hand or in computer form.

An explanatory note is a document that must be attached to the materials about the misconduct. Sometimes explanations can play an important role in the fate of an employee: he can stay at work, and not be fired for violating discipline, if he correctly presents his point of view to the director and justifies his behavior.

The legislation does not require the mandatory compilation of notes, but written excuses are still a document that must be taken into account according to the requirements of the Labor Code. A personnel officer who is interested in an employee must be able to competently compose explanatory notes.

What is an explanatory note

The Labor Code contains a rule: all materials on violation of discipline in the company are analyzed only taking into account the explanations of the culprit. And this means that the degree of guilt of the employee and his possible prosecution is determined only after the culprit explains the circumstances and reasons for his behavior.

By order, the director has the right to request explanations, and the culprit must state them in writing, drawing up according to the rules. The fate of the violator depends on how the explanatory note is framed and how the explanations are presented: the director will decide whether to punish the employee or show leniency.

In fact, an explanatory note is an official document that, according to the norm of Article 193 of the Labor Code, must be attached to an order to give explanations. Explanations are like the last word of the defendant. Although they do not solve the problem, they will be taken into account, and possibly they will influence the decision.

Important

Disciplinary Order will be considered invalid , if two days before its publication (or earlier) no explanations were requested from the culprit.

The personnel officer should not forget about the need to remind the manager about the request for explanations, so that in the event of a disciplinary sanction, the actions are legal.

Important

The culprit has no obligation to write an explanation, but the order to give explanations must be handed over to him against signature!

If the offender refuses to sign the order, an act of refusal to sign is drawn up in his presence. There is another option: send the order by registered mail with acknowledgment of receipt. In this case, the personnel officer will have proof that the requirements of the Labor Code are fulfilled.

Types of explanatory notes

There are two types of notes which can act as:

• explaining the behavior of others;
• justifications for their own behavior.

The first type is applied if an emergency situation or violation of discipline occurred through the fault of outsiders. Such a note describes the circumstances that occurred without the participation of the addressee.

For clarity, an example of an explanatory note from a personnel officer attached to the vacation schedule:

The second type of explanatory notes is a statement by the employee of the circumstances of any violation of discipline or emergency that occurred through his own fault. Since our state is based on the rule of law, in each case, the participant in the dispute must be subject to the presumption of innocence. And therefore, it is impossible to categorically recognize the employee as guilty if he did not participate in the analysis of the situation.

For example, you cannot be reprimanded for being late to work if the latecomer is not asked to explain the reason for the delay.

At the same time, explanatory notes should be drawn up in such a way that the addressee can understand the reasons for the violation of discipline and the very essence of the situation, on which the decision directly depends: execute or pardon.

Differences of an explanatory note from a service, report or explanatory note

Explanations are not explanations and not a report, but an explanation of one's point of view, sometimes different from the generally accepted one, a kind of justification. In turn, a memorandum is a report of a violation, an explanatory note is an annex to the document containing an extended view of it, and a memo is a request.

As you can see, these four types of notes are completely different, but they have the same goal: to convey information. Meanwhile, the form and requirements for the design of these types of notes are similar.

How a note is made

Like any other official document, an explanatory note must be clearly structured. The required elements are:

• hat (indication of the full name and position of the director and the culprit);
• reference to the order or notice of the head;
• the essence of the problem;
• explanations;
• a request for mitigation or release from punishment;
• number and signature of the addressee.

You can make a note both on a computer and in handwriting. However, the impression of the author should not be spoiled by shortcomings:

• you need to write a note on flat paper;
• without errors and strikethroughs;
• in a respectful tone.

Important

A personnel officer can prepare a note form by structuring it, and if necessary, simply print it out and give it to the addressee: he will independently enter the circumstances and his data.

Explanatory note sample

Notification of the employee to give an explanation

It is not in vain that the explanatory note should contain a link to the order
directors. After all, one of the instructions of the Labor Code, when registering a violation of discipline, the culprit should be handed a demand for an explanation against signature.

The requirement is made like this:

• the name of the company is indicated at the top;
• the date and registration number are put (coinciding with the entries in the registration journal);
• the name is written (“Order” or “Demand” for giving explanations);
• the essence of the problem is described (when and why the act of violation of discipline was drawn up);
• the requirement itself is indicated (“I order: to the locksmith of the GC Trubin A.D. to provide the secretary with written explanations about the violation within 2 days from the date of delivery of this requirement”);
• the document is endorsed by the director;
• under the text, the signature of the culprit is put on familiarization with the document (or a link to the act of refusal to sign, or to a postal receipt for sending a registered letter to the culprit).

In its turn the general algorithm for applying punishment according to the rules of Article 193 is as follows:

• an act of violation is drawn up (namely, an act fixing the time of the violation and its essence - an event and a list of actors, and not a requirement to give explanations);
• an order is issued requiring the employee to explain the circumstances: the perpetrator must sign it for familiarization or receive it by mail (ideally, it should be dated the same date as the act of violation);
• the act and explanations are considered by the director and a decision is made (directly on the act, the director can put a visa, for example, “reprimand”);
• two days later, you can issue an order on discipline or not issue it at all, if the director deems it necessary to show leniency (it must be borne in mind that more than 30 days should not elapse from the moment the act was drawn up to the day the order was issued). This period does not include vacation or illness of the culprit).

All materials must be enclosed in the appropriate nomenclature folders. However, if the personnel department provides for separate cases for different types of documents, then copies of the act, the order to give explanations and an explanatory note must be pinned to the original order on discipline.

Important

If the culprit did not consider it necessary to explain himself in two days, it is necessary to draw up an act stating that the order was handed over, but the explanatory note was not provided on time.

What is "Explanation"? What is the correct spelling of this word. Concept and interpretation.

Explanation EXPLANATION - the function of cognition, science, scientific theory, implemented through the logical and methodological procedure for explicating the essence of one object, phenomenon, event, action, etc. (explained, "new") through another (explaining, "cash"), which has the status of reliable, "obvious", understood. Opposes understanding (see IS-TORICISM). The O. component is included in cognitive acts in all spheres and at all levels of human activity. Especially the problem of O. was raised and considered at the disciplinary level in philosophy and theology. In European culture, O.'s function was gradually assigned primarily to scientific knowledge. Scientific O. must meet at least two requirements: 1) adequacy - its arguments and characteristics must be directly related to the objects, phenomena, and events they explain; 2) fundamental verifiability (directly or through its consequences). According to its logical structure, reasoning represents a reasoning or inference, the premises of which contain the information necessary to substantiate such reasoning (inference). The premises are called explanans, the consequences of them are called explanandum. Explanans and explanandum are linked by relations of derivability (following). O. is carried out both at the theoretical and empirical levels of the organization of scientific knowledge. O. in natural science focuses primarily on the disclosure of causal relationships and relationships, although genetic, structural, and functional dependencies can also be explained, but in any case we are talking about revealing a picture of the determination of an object (phenomena, events), its dependencies and conditions. The more fully and deeper the conditions are revealed, the higher the value of O. The most famous and recognized in the methodology of cognition is the deductive-nomological model of scientific O. Popper believed that to give a causal O. of an event means to deduce a statement that describes it, using as premises one or more universal laws together with certain singular statements about initial conditions. Similarly, Carnap argued that the explanans must contain at least one law of science. Thus, the essence of this O. model is to bring the explained phenomenon under the law. At the same time, deduction is understood here not as an inference from the general to the particular, but as any conclusion, the conclusion of which follows from the existing premises with logical necessity according to the accepted rules of deduction. From the point of view of K. Hempel, a general law is a universal conditional statement that can be confirmed or refuted with the help of empirical data, and O. itself is understood as a “universal form hypothesis” (a reference to the causes or determining factors of a given event). The deductive-nomological model of O. is supplemented by a deductive-factual model (O. through an empirically fixed regularity, sometimes one speaks of O. with the help of a disguised law), and their generalization can be designated as the Popper-Hempel scheme, the essence of which is W. Dray defined it as the "covering law" model. Special variants of deductive O. are O. of empirical laws through theoretical principles, through laws of a higher order, as well as O. within a hypothetical-deductive theory (method). Hempel also developed in detail the theory of inductive-statistical reasoning, which presupposes the establishment of empirical relations between classes of events as its basis and interprets induction not as a process of reasoning from the particular to the general, but as any kind of reasoning or inference, the premises of which confirm the conclusion to one degree or another. which is probabilistic. Hempel considers in this connection as a special kind of probabilistic statistical analysis - deductive-statistical (the explanans contains at least one statistical law or theoretical principle). In general, any deductive O. can be interpreted as a special case of inductive O., when the degree of probability of the explanandum becomes equal to one (100%) and, therefore, the probabilistic conclusion becomes reliable. schemes O. may not be fully developed (presented), and then we are talking about incomplete O. ("explaining sketches", according to Hempel). As a special type of O., one can accept the schemes of operationalism and instrumentalism, which presuppose the explication of the “unknown” and its (if possible) reduction to the “known”. Dray proposed (primarily for the analysis of historical events) the model of a “continuous (successive) series of events (incidents)”, in which O. is to fill in the gaps in the series, restoring its continuity. For the analysis of historical events, Dray et al. proposed a model of rational O., the essence of which lies in O. of the behavior of a historical agent (actor, person) through his motives, i.e. through an assessment of its adequacy of the situation (which implies the “projection” of the researcher into the situation, its “replay”, “re-testing”, “rethinking”). For Collingwood, the goal of rational O. is to recreate the "inner side" of a historical event, which is the thoughts of a historical agent. The main difficulties that rational O. faces are as follows: 1) the presence of different types of rationality and the difference in their standards in different historical times and in different sociocultural strata of society; 2) non-rationalization of completely human behavior. In connection with this, Hempel proposed rational O. not through motives, but through the measure of following the system of coercive norms that predetermine the goals of the action (action in accordance with dispositions). A special kind of rational O. has been proposed in ethnomethodology. G.G. Von Wright contrasted both the concepts of causal (whose origins he saw in Galileo's physics of predicting events) and the concepts of rational O. - the model of teleological (intentional) O., the origins of which he attributed to Aristotle's attitude to make the facts finalistically understandable. O. does not consist in indicating the rationality of the action, but the goal pursued by the individual (or his intentions), and is based on the theory of “practical conclusion” (in which one premise speaks of the desired result (goal), while the other indicates the means to achieve this goal , and the inferential judgment is a description of the action; in this case, the scheme can be complicated by introducing additional restrictions on the possible action into the premises). O.'s connection with description, narrative, gave rise to a number of narrative concepts of O. Thus, T. Nickles proceeded from the fact that when explaining facts, we are dealing with their various descriptions, which are difficult to transform into each other and therefore must be explained as separate . Hence the model of singular causal O., proceeding from a critical rethinking of Hempel's ideas. Thus, O. removes the requirement for inference connections that can be given through a story (an explanatory narrative, indicating that the event was not unexpected, as it initially seemed). So-called model symbols (objectives with the help of models, primarily of a symbolic nature) are considered as a special type of symbolism.