Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Billy's throw is a preempted potential cause, not an actu... — Carmelics
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Billy's throw is a preempted potential cause, not an actual cause of the bottle shattering

    Causation
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Billy's throw would have shattered the bottle only if Suzy had not thrown first
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Suzy's throw preempted Billy's throw by completing the causal process first
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A cause that is cut short before producing its effect does not count as an actual cause
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Causal contribution can be grounded in intrinsic features of a process rather than its counterfactual relationship to competing processes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Billy's throw initiates a continuous physical process toward the bottle that carries genuine causal influence independent of Suzy's throw.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A cause's status as 'actual' should not be negated solely by the accidental presence of a faster redundant process—this conflates causal priority with causal reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On an INUS condition account (Mackie), Billy's throw is an insufficient but necessary part of a sufficient condition in worlds where Suzy abstains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The preemption verdict depends on privileging one metaphysical framework (counterfactual dependence) over others that assign Billy genuine causal status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Philosophical accounts that yield asymmetric verdicts across structurally analogous causal scenarios lack the principled basis required to exclude Billy entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Causation

    Related

    A cause that is cut short before producing its effect does not count as an actua...A cause's status as 'actual' should not be negated solely by the accidental pres...Billy's throw initiates a continuous physical process toward the bottle that car...Billy's throw would have shattered the bottle only if Suzy had not thrown first
    +5 moreShow less
    Causal contribution can be grounded in intrinsic features of a process rather th...On an INUS condition account (Mackie), Billy's throw is an insufficient but nece...Philosophical accounts that yield asymmetric verdicts across structurally analog...Suzy's throw preempted Billy's throw by completing the causal process firstThe preemption verdict depends on privileging one metaphysical framework (counte...

    Similar

    Suzy's throw caused the bottle to shatter, not Billy's throw93%Lewis's counterfactual theory of causation cannot explain the judgemen...89%There is no causal dependence between Suzy's throw and the shattering ...88%Billy's throw would have shattered the bottle only if Suzy had not thr...88%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: causation-counterfactual
    View source passageHide passage
    Billy and Suzy throw rocks at a bottle. Suzy throws first so that her rock arrives first and shatters the glass; Billy’s rock sails through the air where the bottle had stood moments earlier. Without Suzy’s throw, Billy’s throw would have shattered the bottle. However, Suzy’s throw caused the bottle to shatter, while Billy’s throw is merely a preempted potential cause. This is a case of late preemption because the alternative process (Billy’s throw) is cut short by the main process (Suzy’s throw
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit