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 Mackie's INUS condition analysis entails that a cause need only be an insufficient but necessary part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition, not an independent antecedent.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.INUS conflates causal relevance with logical necessity; a condition can be logically necessary to a disjunction without being causally efficacious.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The analysis struggles with cases where background conditions (oxygen, gravity) seem more 'necessary' than the putative cause, challenging intuitions about what truly causes events.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If causes need not be independent antecedents, it becomes unclear why we privilege some conditions as 'the cause' rather than treating all sufficient-condition components equally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Causation in complex systems often involves multiple sufficient conditions; INUS captures this by not requiring causes to be independently sufficient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mackie's analysis correctly identifies that a cause like 'striking a match' is insufficient alone but necessary within the sufficient condition of 'oxygen present AND match struck AND friction applied.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This framework avoids both overdetermination problems and the implausible demand that causes must work independently of all background conditions.
      ?

      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.