The argument assumes that all causation requires universal laws connecting cause-types to effect-types, but agent-causation theorists like Roderick Chisholm hold that agents cause actions without subsuming them under any covering law.

?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.

Cause-types and effect-types(as used in philosophy of causation): Categories or kinds of things—for example, 'heating' is a cause-type and 'expansion' is an effect-type, rather than specific individual instances.
Covering law(as used in philosophy of science and explanations of causation): A universal rule or law that explains why something happened by showing it's an example of that general rule—like explaining why water boiled by pointing to the law that water boils at 100°C.
Roderick Chisholm(as referenced by name in the statement): A 20th-century American philosopher known for developing detailed theories about knowledge, justified belief, and how much evidence we need to believe something.
Universal laws(as used in ethics): Rules that apply to everyone equally, without exception, rather than rules that apply only to certain people or situations.

Based on where you are in your exploration