The Comparative Variability Theory of Causation

So, where are we? Let me briefly summarize what I have presented and argued for so far. Part I set the stage for the discussion about causation in the special sciences. Chapter 1 elaborated criteria of adequacy for an explication of causation in the special sciences (the naturalist and the distinction criterion). Chapter 2 introduced the influential interventionist theory of causation. I focused on Woodward’s widely-received interventionist approach according to which X causes Y iff, roughly, there is a possible intervention on X that changes the value of Y . I argued that interventionist theories are prima facie (promising to be) in accord with the criteria of adequacy, although I diagnosed that there are several desiderata that have to be addressed by interventionists (most importantly, interventionists ought to account for the explication of a non-universal law, and for the features of time-asymmetry and causal asymmetry). These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.