If causal sufficiency is represented counterfactually, then the ice is also counterfactually dependent on the frost (if no frost, no ice) and the frost is counterfactually dependent on the ice (if no ice, no frost)

As we saw above, Hume also believed that causal statements entail counterfactuals, but the question is whether causal statements are definable in terms of counterfactuals. Here is an objection against such an attempt: Consider the following example. Because of severe frost during the night, ice covers the lake this morning. So, given the circumstances, if it had not been severe frost, there would not have been any ice on the lake. However, in these circumstances, the frost as the cause of the ic