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
    Schaffner's criticism of Enç for assuming that reduction ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Schaffner's criticism of Enç for assuming that reduction is causation is misplaced

    CausationTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Enç explicitly draws on Aristotelian formal causation, where 'cause' denotes constitutive dependence rather than efficient causal production.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Schaffner's criticism presupposes a Humean regularity model of causation, which Enç's framework deliberately rejects in favor of metaphysical grounding relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating these two causal frameworks renders Schaffner's objection a mere terminological dispute rather than a substantive philosophical challenge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kim's work on supervenience establishes that reductive dependence relations can be asymmetric and necessitating without being straightforwardly causal in the efficient sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Enç's account of reductive dependence shares structural features with Kim's supervenience, suggesting his 'causation' talk is shorthand for ontological priority, not causal production.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Schaffner's failure to engage with the supervenience literature available at the time of his critique leaves his interpretation of Enç textually and philosophically unsupported.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Enç's description of reductive dependence does not actually commit him to the claim that reduction is causation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Schaffner interprets Enç as literally equating reduction with causation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.That interpretation overlooks the non-standard sense in which Enç uses 'causation'
      ?

      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

    CausationTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language2 linked

    Related

    Conflating these two causal frameworks renders Schaffner's objection a mere term...Enç explicitly draws on Aristotelian formal causation, where 'cause' denotes con...Enç's account of reductive dependence shares structural features with Kim's supe...Enç's description of reductive dependence does not actually commit him to the cl...
    +5 moreShow less
    Kim's work on supervenience establishes that reductive dependence relations can ...Schaffner interprets Enç as literally equating reduction with causationSchaffner's criticism presupposes a Humean regularity model of causation, which ...Schaffner's failure to engage with the supervenience literature available at the...That interpretation overlooks the non-standard sense in which Enç uses 'causatio...

    Similar

    Schaffner interprets Enç as literally equating reduction with causatio...90%Enç's description of reductive dependence does not actually commit him...84%Enç's use of 'causation' should not be interpreted as claiming that re...81%Langer's critique of Dewey was based on a misinterpretation81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: scientific-reduction
    View source passageHide passage
    Mechanistic explanation is non-causal, and so is reductive explanation. However, sometimes, reductionist models are phrased in causal terminology. Enç (1976) is a case in point. He describes reductive explanation and reductive dependence as causal. The description he gives of this relation, however, does not fit the usual use of the term ‘causation’. Enç describes it as a ‘generative’ relation that may hold between an object a and an object b even if a=b. Hence, despite the fact that he uses the
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit