If retrocausation holds, then any apparent 'intervention' after prediction B must itself be part of the causal chain that produced B, making true prevention nomologically impossible.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Retrocausation(in philosophy of causation): A theoretical situation where an effect happens before its cause—basically, the future causes the past, which is usually considered impossible in normal reality.
True prevention(as used in discussions of causality and free will): Actually stopping something from happening, rather than just changing how it happens.
causal chain(Avicenna's cosmological argument in Ilāhiyyāt VIII): An ordered series of causes within a given causal type (formal, material, efficient, or final) that Avicenna argues must terminate in a First Cause
intervention(Used within manipulability theories of causation): An action or event I on a variable X that breaks the causal connection between X and its causes while leaving other causal mechanisms intact, or that does not affect Y via a causal route that does not go through X.

Based on where you are in your exploration