We have a somewhat problem free handle on talk about causes, effects and causal explanations. We have a somewhat problem free handle on talk about causes, effects and causal explanations.Example: The beer got me so drunk that I fell down the stairs causing a fracture in my leg. That explains why I am moving around using these crutches.In science, acknowledging causes and effects is central !
We would normally not question that there are causes and effects. We would normally not question that there are causes and effects.There seems to be an apparent necessity in causal relationships.Regularities are just things or processes that we see repeated in nature.We have no epistemic justification for saying that they are necessary.
c causes e iff c causes e iff (I) c is spatiotemporally contiguous to e (II) e succeeds c in time, and (III) all events of type C (i.e., events that are like c) are regularly followed by or constantly conjoined with events of type E (i.e. events like e)Our ‘received view’ of causation tells us that causation happens in virtue of ‘something else’.If c causes e, it is because there is some real connection between c and e (that necessitates e happening when c happens).
We evaluate worlds with regard to matters of fact and laws. We evaluate worlds with regard to matters of fact and laws.Some of these matters of fact will be causal.Laws of nature are sometimes considered to be causal.- Whether objects fall to the ground will depend on whether they are supported.
- How far you can jump will depend on whether the laws of gravitation hold.
So, when we determine the truth conditions for certain counterfactuals we already have to assume that certain causal facts either obtain or do not obtain in the worlds we evaluate with regard to their similarity.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
