I will use the argumentative theory of reasoning to clarify why and how some inferences are guided by the goal of explaining. Lipton (2005) nicely shows that abductive reasonning is central in the sciences. However, he characterises abductions as inferences to the best explanation and through their semantic and epistemological properties rather than by specifying their psychological underpinning.
I will show that the argumentative theory of reasoning provides a means to understand which psychological processes philosophers of science have referred to when talking about abduction. This will lead me to claim that abductions are in fact inferences to convincing
explanation. With this psychological characterisation, one is better able to specify the semantic and epistemic properties of a key inference at work in scientific reasoning.