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
    The bilking argument does not successfully demonstrate th... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The bilking argument does not successfully demonstrate that backward causation is impossible

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dummett's 1954 analysis shows the bilking argument presupposes causal asymmetry rather than deriving it, making it question-begging against backward causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A world with stable backward causal laws would include compensating factors preventing successful bilking, just as forward causal laws permit overdetermination and preemption.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The impossibility of bilking in such a world is a feature of the causal structure, not evidence against it, as Lewis's counterfactual framework applied retrogradely demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Price's agency theory establishes that causal direction is indexed to the perspective of agents, meaning backward causation is coherent wherever an agent's earlier actions systematically influence later states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If bilking experiments themselves constitute interventions in the causal structure, Woodward's interventionist framework entails they must respect the very causal relations they purport to test.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The bilking argument claims backward causation is impossible because one can always intervene after observing the alleged effect B and prevent the alleged cause A from occurring
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When intervention actually occurs and A is prevented after B has occurred, only that particular token instance of A is shown not to be the cause of that particular token instance of B
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.In all cases where no intervention occurs, events of type A may still be the cause of events of type B
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Topics

    Causation

    Related

    A world with stable backward causal laws would include compensating factors prev...Dummett's 1954 analysis shows the bilking argument presupposes causal asymmetry ...If bilking experiments themselves constitute interventions in the causal structu...In all cases where no intervention occurs, events of type A may still be the cau...
    +6 moreShow less
    Price's agency theory establishes that causal direction is indexed to the perspe...The bilking argument claims backward causation is impossible because one can alw...The bilking argument therefore shows only that a particular token cause can be p...The impossibility of bilking in such a world is a feature of the causal structur...The same situation arises in forward causation: preventing a particular token P ...When intervention actually occurs and A is prevented after B has occurred, only ...

    Similar

    The bilking argument claims backward causation is impossible because o...95%The force of the bilking argument against backward causation can be we...94%If the assumption does not hold for backward causation, Mellor's argum...89%The notion of backward causation is incoherent87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: causation-backwards
    View source passageHide passage
    Now, the bilking argument holds that backward causation is impossible because we can always intervene after we have observe that the alleged effect occurs and obstruct the alleged cause from occurring. Since nothing prohibits us from doing this whenever we want, it demonstrates that backward causation does not take place. Indeed, if we actually intervene and prevent \(A\) after \(B\) has occurred, then of course a particular later \(A\) (which does not exist) cannot be the cause of a particular
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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