2020Oxford University Press eBooksRequires access

Causal Circumstances

Paul Noordhof

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The proposed analysis of causation has two immediate consequences regarding causal relata. The first is that the analysis will be satisfied by both an element in some causal circumstances for an effect and also by the causal circumstances taken in toto for that event, sometimes called the total cause of the effect. The second is that the analysis does not distinguish between elements in the causal circumstances, characterizing some as causes, others as enabling conditions, to take one alternative. These consequences are defended against those inclined to reject them or propose supplementation to the analysis. The idea of causes as contra-normal conditions either derives from certain biases at work in our attributions of causes or can be the basis for a pragmatic explanation of why we favour elements in causal circumstances as causes over others. It is a mistake to take contra-normality to be part of the nature of causation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The proposed analysis of causation has two immediate consequences regarding causal relata. The first is that the analysis will be satisfied by both an element in some causal circumstances for an effect and also by the causal circumstances taken in toto for that event, sometimes called the total cause of the effect. The second is that the analysis does not distinguish between elements in the causal circumstances, characterizing some as causes, others as enabling conditions, to take one alternative. These consequences are defended against those inclined to reject them or propose supplementation to the analysis. The idea of causes as contra-normal conditions either derives from certain biases at work in our attributions of causes or can be the basis for a pragmatic explanation of why we favour elements in causal circumstances as causes over others. It is a mistake to take contra-normality to be part of the nature of causation.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The proposed analysis of causation has two immediate consequences regarding causal relata. The first is that the analysis will be satisfied by both an element in some causal circumstances for an effect and also by the causal circumstances taken in toto for that event, sometimes called the total cause of the effect. The second is that the analysis does not distinguish between elements in the causal circumstances, characterizing some as causes, others as enabling conditions, to take one alternative. These consequences are defended against those inclined to reject them or propose supplementation to the analysis. The idea of causes as contra-normal conditions either derives from certain biases at work in our attributions of causes or can be the basis for a pragmatic explanation of why we favour elements in causal circumstances as causes over others. It is a mistake to take contra-normality to be part of the nature of causation.

Key concepts: Causation, Causal analysis, Mistake, Attribution, Normality, Causality (physics), Causal model, Element (criminal law)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Causal Circumstances — Research Paper | ScholarLens