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
    Causation must be something different from what we ordina... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Causation must be something different from what we ordinarily take it to be

    CausationSkepticism
    ?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.Our ordinary notion of causation involves causes necessitating their effects
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We lack sensory awareness of this necessitation between cause and effect
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.We see the first billiard ball hit the second and the second move, but we do not see the movement of the first necessitate the movement of the second
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Causal power is directly perceived in our own volitional acts, giving us non-inferential access to genuine efficacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reid argues we have an original perception of power when we act, making necessitation known through active experience, not sensory impression.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If one legitimate source of causal concepts exists outside Humean impressions, the empiricist derivation argument collapses entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's argument conflates the epistemic claim that we cannot observe necessitation with the metaphysical claim that necessitation does not exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The absence of sensory access to a relation does not entail that the relation is absent from the causal nexus itself.
      ?

      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

    SkepticismCausation

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception3 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Causal power is directly perceived in our own volitional acts, giving us non-inf...Hume's argument conflates the epistemic claim that we cannot observe necessitati...If one legitimate source of causal concepts exists outside Humean impressions, t...Our ordinary notion of causation involves causes necessitating their effects
    +5 moreShow less
    Reid argues we have an original perception of power when we act, making necessit...The absence of sensory access to a relation does not entail that the relation is...The concept of causation must be derived from sensory experience (impressions)We lack sensory awareness of this necessitation between cause and effect

    Similar

    PH is widely believed to differ from PSPACE76%The way things appear to you cannot provide knowledge that you are not...70%We cannot disentangle what is given from our ways of thinking about it...70%Claim (2) is standardly read as 'any of our beliefs may turn out to be...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reid
    View source passageHide passage
    Reid develops his account of causation in light of Hume's account. As Reid sees it, Hume starts with the assumption that if we are to learn what causation is, we must first determine from what aspect of our sensory experience the concept of causation is derived. Hume would put the point in terms of the Way of Ideas as follows: we must determine from what impression our idea of causation is copied. However, Hume believed he had discovered that there is nothing in our sensory experience correspond
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    We see the first billiard ball hit the second and the second move, but we do not...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit