The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation
The counterfactual tradition to defining actual causation has come a long way since Lewis started it off. However there are still important open problems that need to be solved. One of them is the (in)transitivity of causation. Endorsing transitivity was a major source of trouble for the approach ta...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy an Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 2017-01, Vol.4, p.1-+ |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | + |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Beckers, Sander Vennekens, Joost |
description | The counterfactual tradition to defining actual causation has come a long way since Lewis started it off. However there are still important open problems that need to be solved. One of them is the (in)transitivity of causation. Endorsing transitivity was a major source of trouble for the approach taken by Lewis, which is why currently most approaches reject it. But transitivity has never lost its appeal, and there is a large literature devoted to understanding why this is so. Starting from a survey of this work, we will develop a formal analysis of transitivity and the problems it poses for causation. This analysis provides us with a sufficient condition for causation to be transitive, a sufficient condition for de- pendence to be necessary for causation, and several characterisations of the transitivity of dependence. Finally, we show how this analysis leads naturally to several conditions a definition of causation should satisfy, and use those to suggest a new definition of causation. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>kuleuven</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_kuleuven_dspace_123456789_570017</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>123456789_570017</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-kuleuven_dspace_123456789_5700173</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjbEOgjAURRujiQT4h24OhqSlVGQkROMHsDcNlFiFYnivRP5eBwdHpnuGk3M3JEiFYEnGeLb94z2JAR6MMS6FLDgLSFrfDa0n7cCinS0uVLuWlrAMg8FpoWNHywa97mmlPWi0o4vIrtM9mPi3ITlcL3V1S56-N342TrXw0o1RPBWZPOXnQsn8e5mLkBzXmQrfKNZ3P67fRBM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Institutional Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation</title><source>Lirias (KU Leuven Association)</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Beckers, Sander ; Vennekens, Joost</creator><creatorcontrib>Beckers, Sander ; Vennekens, Joost</creatorcontrib><description>The counterfactual tradition to defining actual causation has come a long way since Lewis started it off. However there are still important open problems that need to be solved. One of them is the (in)transitivity of causation. Endorsing transitivity was a major source of trouble for the approach taken by Lewis, which is why currently most approaches reject it. But transitivity has never lost its appeal, and there is a large literature devoted to understanding why this is so. Starting from a survey of this work, we will develop a formal analysis of transitivity and the problems it poses for causation. This analysis provides us with a sufficient condition for causation to be transitive, a sufficient condition for de- pendence to be necessary for causation, and several characterisations of the transitivity of dependence. Finally, we show how this analysis leads naturally to several conditions a definition of causation should satisfy, and use those to suggest a new definition of causation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2330-4014</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2330-4014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Michigan Publishing</publisher><ispartof>Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 2017-01, Vol.4, p.1-+</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,315,780,784,27860</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Beckers, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vennekens, Joost</creatorcontrib><title>The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation</title><title>Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy</title><description>The counterfactual tradition to defining actual causation has come a long way since Lewis started it off. However there are still important open problems that need to be solved. One of them is the (in)transitivity of causation. Endorsing transitivity was a major source of trouble for the approach taken by Lewis, which is why currently most approaches reject it. But transitivity has never lost its appeal, and there is a large literature devoted to understanding why this is so. Starting from a survey of this work, we will develop a formal analysis of transitivity and the problems it poses for causation. This analysis provides us with a sufficient condition for causation to be transitive, a sufficient condition for de- pendence to be necessary for causation, and several characterisations of the transitivity of dependence. Finally, we show how this analysis leads naturally to several conditions a definition of causation should satisfy, and use those to suggest a new definition of causation.</description><issn>2330-4014</issn><issn>2330-4014</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>FZOIL</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjbEOgjAURRujiQT4h24OhqSlVGQkROMHsDcNlFiFYnivRP5eBwdHpnuGk3M3JEiFYEnGeLb94z2JAR6MMS6FLDgLSFrfDa0n7cCinS0uVLuWlrAMg8FpoWNHywa97mmlPWi0o4vIrtM9mPi3ITlcL3V1S56-N342TrXw0o1RPBWZPOXnQsn8e5mLkBzXmQrfKNZ3P67fRBM</recordid><startdate>201701</startdate><enddate>201701</enddate><creator>Beckers, Sander</creator><creator>Vennekens, Joost</creator><general>Michigan Publishing</general><scope>FZOIL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201701</creationdate><title>The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation</title><author>Beckers, Sander ; Vennekens, Joost</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-kuleuven_dspace_123456789_5700173</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Beckers, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vennekens, Joost</creatorcontrib><collection>Lirias (KU Leuven Association)</collection><jtitle>Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Beckers, Sander</au><au>Vennekens, Joost</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation</atitle><jtitle>Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy</jtitle><date>2017-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>4</volume><spage>1</spage><epage>+</epage><pages>1-+</pages><issn>2330-4014</issn><eissn>2330-4014</eissn><abstract>The counterfactual tradition to defining actual causation has come a long way since Lewis started it off. However there are still important open problems that need to be solved. One of them is the (in)transitivity of causation. Endorsing transitivity was a major source of trouble for the approach taken by Lewis, which is why currently most approaches reject it. But transitivity has never lost its appeal, and there is a large literature devoted to understanding why this is so. Starting from a survey of this work, we will develop a formal analysis of transitivity and the problems it poses for causation. This analysis provides us with a sufficient condition for causation to be transitive, a sufficient condition for de- pendence to be necessary for causation, and several characterisations of the transitivity of dependence. Finally, we show how this analysis leads naturally to several conditions a definition of causation should satisfy, and use those to suggest a new definition of causation.</abstract><pub>Michigan Publishing</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2330-4014 |
ispartof | Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 2017-01, Vol.4, p.1-+ |
issn | 2330-4014 2330-4014 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_kuleuven_dspace_123456789_570017 |
source | Lirias (KU Leuven Association); DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
title | The Transitivity and Asymmetry of Actual Causation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T15%3A22%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-kuleuven&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Transitivity%20and%20Asymmetry%20of%20Actual%20Causation&rft.jtitle=Ergo,%20an%20Open%20Access%20Journal%20of%20Philosophy&rft.au=Beckers,%20Sander&rft.date=2017-01&rft.volume=4&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=+&rft.pages=1-+&rft.issn=2330-4014&rft.eissn=2330-4014&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Ckuleuven%3E123456789_570017%3C/kuleuven%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |