Philosophy Now Forum

According to this, it may not:

"What causes what in the natural world? When you open up a book on quantum field theory or particle physics, words like ’cause’ and ‘effect’ appear nowhere in the book. The idea that A precedes B and therefore A causes B is a feature of our big macroscopic world. It’s not a feature of particle physics."

Quoted from http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2015052 ... future_rss

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Does cause exist in the macroworld? According to this, it may not: . . . The idea that A precedes B and therefore A causes B is a feature of our big macroscopic world . . .

So there's a warning elsewhere in the article that the meaning of some of its sentences should be inverted?

I believe "cause" has been replaced by exacting use of "functional relationships." "Cause" is too narrow in that it is isolated and saturated with human projections which ultimately leads to primal causes.