What We Talk About When We Talk About Causality

Bogen, Jim (2001) What We Talk About When We Talk About Causality.

Full text available as:
Microsoft Word - Requires a viewer, such as Microsoft Word Viewer

Abstract

This paper compares the relative merits of two alternatives to traditional accounts of causal explanation: Jim Woodward's counterfactual invariance account, and the Mechanistic account of Machamer, Darden, and Craver. Mechanism wins (a) because we have good causal explanations for chaotic effects whose production does not exhibit the counterfactual regularities Woodward requires, and (b)because arguments suggested by Belnap's and Green's discussion of prediction (in'Facing the Future' chpt 6)show that the relevant counterfactuals about ideal interventions on non-deterministic and deterministic systems lack truth value.

Keywords:causal explanation, Woodward, Mechanism, Machamer-Darden-Craver
Subjects:General Issues: Causation
General Issues: Explanation
General Issues: Laws of Nature
Conferences and Volumes:[2001] Pitt-London Workshop in the Philosophy of Biology and Neuroscience (London, September 2001)
ID Code:361
Deposited By:bogen, jim
Deposited On:10 August 2001