Philosophy Now Forum

In maths we distinguish between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition.

In law we are taught about a conditio sine qua non (a condition that if left out the occuring result = a criminal act would not have taken place) and a Zurechnung (can a certain chain of events be blamed on an individual).

The main problem of causation is that usually there is a huge bunch of causes and if one of them gets left out the result is different.
So we need to select some causes and then say that an agent willingly arranged a certain chain of events and is therefore responsible.

Causation seems to me to be a useful illusion that works in daily life.

duszek wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:41 pm
Causation seems to me to be a useful illusion that works in daily life.

Yes, because for most life tasks, all we need to know are the proximal and direct causes.
I fell off the ladder. The ladder slipped sideways. On inspection, I discovered that I had placed the feet on uneven ground.
All I need for future reference is the fact that even ground will give a ladder more stability.

In different situations, more information may be required.
A police detective needs to know what sequence of events - certainly in the last 24 hours, possibly much longer - led up to the murder.
A doctor needs to know proximate cause (the last straw, as it were), contributing causes, underlying cause and ultimate cause of an illness.
A diplomat needs to follow extensive webs of international spider-mongery.