Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T05:18:23.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Causality: Production and Propagation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2022

Wesley C. Salmon
Wesley C. Salmon*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A standard picture of causality has been around at least since the time of Hume. The general idea is that we have two (or more) distinct events which bear some sort of cause-effect relation to one another. There has, of course, been considerable controversy regarding the nature of both the relation and the relata. It has sometimes been maintained, for instance, that facts or propositions (rather than events) are the sorts of entities which can constitute the relata. It has long been disputed whether individual events or only classes of events can sustain cause-effect relations. The relation itself has sometimes been taken to be that of sufficient condition, sometimes necessary condition, or perhaps a combination of the two. Some authors have even proposed that certain sorts of statistical relations constitute causal relations.

Type
Part I. Probability and Causality
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1980 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1980 , 1980 , pp. 49 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. SES-7809146.

References

Chaffee, Frederic H. Jr., (1980). “The Discovery of a Gravitational Lens.” Scientific American 243(5): 70-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, David. (1979). “Causation and the Flow of Energy.” Erkenntnis 14: 219-250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grünbaum, Adolf. (1973). Philosophical Problems of Space and Time. 2nd ed. Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackie, J.L. (1974). The Cement of the Universe. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. (1956). The Direction of Time. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. (1948). Human Knowledge, Its Scope and Limits. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley C. (1977). “An ‘At-At’ Theory of Causal Influence.” Philosophy of Science 44: 215-224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, Wesley C. (1978). “Why Ask ‘Why?’ – An Inquiry Concerning Scientific Explanation.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 51: 683-705. (Reprinted in Salmon, Wesley C. (ed.). (1979). Hans Reichenbach: Logical Empiricist. Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co. Pages 403-425.).Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley C. (1980). “Probabilistic Causality.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 61: 50-74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venn, John. (1866). The Logic of Chance. London and Cambridge: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
Winnie, John. (1977). “The Causal Theory of Space-Time.” In Foundations of Space-Time Theories. (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. VIII.) Edited by Earman, John, Glymour, Clark , and Stachel, John. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Pages 134-205.Google Scholar