Raymond Tallis hunts for the source of causation.
http://philosophynow.org/issues/100/Cau ... ocal_Oomph
Causes As (Local) Oomph
Re: Causes As (Local) Oomph
I was rather surprised by Raymond Tallis’s “Causes as (Local) Oomph” article in Issue 100. It seems he (and apparently other philosophers as well) has given up on causality, writing, “we observe many items that we do not regard as causally connected, and indeed differentiate between valid and invalid attributions of causation. Causal connections are not universal.” I would respectfully disagree.
It may be true that the notion of causation does not clear the metaphysical hoops imposed by philosophers, but causation is the life blood of nature; where nature includes both the material world and the cognitive one. That is, nothing can occur in nature without cause. There is no uncaused cause, no prime mover, no ex nihilo singularity. Causation is not contingent. Causation is necessary.
Of course, the difficulty in accepting the idea of an uncaused cause is to admit an infinite regression of causes. But this is no different, it seems to me, than considering the future as unending, eternal, forever -- an infinite progression of causes and effects. For humans, this is a paradox. But we are locked into a time-space continuum at the human scale and we can only apprehend reality anthropically. Nature has no such limitations.
And contrary to physicist Lawrence M. Krauss’s conclusion in his 2012 book. “A Universe From Nothing – Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing,” I believe, in nature, something can come from nothing only if nothing is something. Parmenides had it right, “ex nihilo nihil fit,” (nothing comes from nothing.)
Further, I understand causes to be mostly nonlinear, multifarious, complex, highly chaotic, and virtually incalculable. But, to the extent there is a particular event carved out of a particular time frame and observed in a particular location, the cause of which can be considered in a linear closed system, then the application of such esoteric metaphysical constructs as “nomological subsumption,” constitutive properties,” “counterfactuals,” and “phenomenalism” might be appropriate. On the other hand such analyses may be over-thinking the issue.
Consider too that causes give rise to motion, concurrent with time, which is a measure of motion. And multiple causes, like a chain reaction, are mostly chaotic; where chaos is "a small change at one place in a deterministic nonlinear system that can result in large differences to a later state;” e.g., the butterfly effect. This further complicates the notion of determinism, even though, in a theoretical world, causes are determinable.
Likewise, there are no “gaps” in causation; no pauses, no suspension of action. Motion itself is an agent of causation and, in its constant battle with entropy, is also kinetic, albeit with greater or lesser effects.
Of course, causation is also fundamental to our mental processes, rendering free will moot. We come into the world with a lot of history already built in to our selves; a history over which we had no choice. As we mature from infants to children to adults to old age, our exposure to, and our perception and processing of the external environment, adds to that history. But for all its complexity, the simple truth is that it all plays out through a series of causes and effects recorded in our neurons, racing along the synaptic highways in our brains powered by neurotransmitters.
The late great Carl Sagan understood causality quite well. "If you want to make an apple pie from scratch," Sagan declared, "you must first create the universe."
I would be interested in your comments.
It may be true that the notion of causation does not clear the metaphysical hoops imposed by philosophers, but causation is the life blood of nature; where nature includes both the material world and the cognitive one. That is, nothing can occur in nature without cause. There is no uncaused cause, no prime mover, no ex nihilo singularity. Causation is not contingent. Causation is necessary.
Of course, the difficulty in accepting the idea of an uncaused cause is to admit an infinite regression of causes. But this is no different, it seems to me, than considering the future as unending, eternal, forever -- an infinite progression of causes and effects. For humans, this is a paradox. But we are locked into a time-space continuum at the human scale and we can only apprehend reality anthropically. Nature has no such limitations.
And contrary to physicist Lawrence M. Krauss’s conclusion in his 2012 book. “A Universe From Nothing – Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing,” I believe, in nature, something can come from nothing only if nothing is something. Parmenides had it right, “ex nihilo nihil fit,” (nothing comes from nothing.)
Further, I understand causes to be mostly nonlinear, multifarious, complex, highly chaotic, and virtually incalculable. But, to the extent there is a particular event carved out of a particular time frame and observed in a particular location, the cause of which can be considered in a linear closed system, then the application of such esoteric metaphysical constructs as “nomological subsumption,” constitutive properties,” “counterfactuals,” and “phenomenalism” might be appropriate. On the other hand such analyses may be over-thinking the issue.
Consider too that causes give rise to motion, concurrent with time, which is a measure of motion. And multiple causes, like a chain reaction, are mostly chaotic; where chaos is "a small change at one place in a deterministic nonlinear system that can result in large differences to a later state;” e.g., the butterfly effect. This further complicates the notion of determinism, even though, in a theoretical world, causes are determinable.
Likewise, there are no “gaps” in causation; no pauses, no suspension of action. Motion itself is an agent of causation and, in its constant battle with entropy, is also kinetic, albeit with greater or lesser effects.
Of course, causation is also fundamental to our mental processes, rendering free will moot. We come into the world with a lot of history already built in to our selves; a history over which we had no choice. As we mature from infants to children to adults to old age, our exposure to, and our perception and processing of the external environment, adds to that history. But for all its complexity, the simple truth is that it all plays out through a series of causes and effects recorded in our neurons, racing along the synaptic highways in our brains powered by neurotransmitters.
The late great Carl Sagan understood causality quite well. "If you want to make an apple pie from scratch," Sagan declared, "you must first create the universe."
I would be interested in your comments.