The scientific domain We find ourselves as human beings here and now is the praxis of living, in the happenig of being human, in language languaging, in an a priori experiential situation in which everything that is, everything that happens, is and happens in us as part of our praxis of living. In these circumstances, whatever we say about how anything happens takes place in the praxis of our living as a comment, as a reflexion, as a reformulation, in short, as an explanation of the praxis of our living, and as such it does not replace or constitute the praxis of living that it purports to explain. Thus, to say that we are made of matter, or to say that we are ideas in the mind of God, are both explanations of that wich we live as our experience of being, yet neither matter nor ideas in the mind of God constitute the experience of being that which they are supposed to explain.
Explanations take place operationally in a metadomain with respect to that which they explain.
Furthermore, in daily life, in the actual dynamics of human interactions, an explanations is always an answer to a question about the origin of a given phenomenon, and is accepted or rejected by a listener who accepts or rejects it according to whether or not it satisfies a particular implicit or explicit criterion of acceptability that he or she specifies. Therefore, there are as many different kinds of explanations as there are different criteria of acceptability of reformulation of the happening of living of the observers that the observers specify. Accordingly, every domain of explanations as it is defined by a particular criterion of acceptability, constitutes a closed cognitive domain as a domain of acceptable statements of actions for the observes that accept that criterion of acceptability. Science, modern science, as a cognitive domain is not an exception to this. Let me make this explicit.