 Here we have a more threatening problem, since there is no apparent basis for denying that an argument having this form satisfies Hempel’s criteria and therefore ought to be both explanatory and predictive. Similarly for temporally quantified arguments, where the fact that a match of kind \(K\) has not lighted at \(t^*\) would certainly not be adequate to explain why it was not struck at t, even though every match of kind \(K\) will light when it is struck, under suitable conditions! Something serious thus appears to be wrong (Fetzer 2000a).