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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Causation is a natural relation, not a philosophical relation

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant argues that causation is a pure concept of the understanding (category) that the mind imposes on experience a priori, not derived from it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If causation is constituted by cognitive structure rather than discovered through repeated impressions, it cannot be reduced to a natural relation among perceptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hume's own regularity account presupposes the very uniformity of nature it claims to explain, revealing that 'natural relation' already embeds a rationalist commitment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Anscombe and neo-Aristotelian powers theorists hold that singular causal transactions are directly perceivable in individual cases of force, pressure, and agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If necessary connection is observable in a single case of direct physical causation, then P3 of the supporting argument—that repeated experience is required—is false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A relation grounded in perceivable causal powers in individual instances satisfies Hume's own criterion for philosophical relations, undermining the natural/philosophical distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Philosophical relations are immediately evident on reflection or comparison of particular ideas
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The necessary connection between cause and effect is not immediately apparent to reason upon reflection on a single impression or comparison
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The necessary connection between cause and effect becomes evident only through repeated experience of qualitatively similar pairs of impressions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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