The Nyāya restriction that antecedence must be 'established otherwise' introduces an epistemic condition into a metaphysical relation, conflating causal discovery with causal constitution.

?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.

Antecedence(in discussing causal relationships): When one thing comes before another in time or in a sequence of cause and effect; the quality of being an antecedent (the cause that comes first).
Causal constitution(as a metaphysical (reality-based) concept): What actually makes something be a cause in reality—the fundamental nature of how causation works in the world itself.
Causal discovery(as an epistemic (knowledge-based) process): The process of finding out or learning that one thing causes another through investigation and evidence.
Conflating: Conflating means mixing together or treating two different things as if they were the same thing, when they're actually distinct. It's a logical error where someone blurs important differences between concepts, ideas, or situations to make an argument seem stronger than it is. For example, conflating "being critical of a policy" with "being disloyal to your country" wrongly equates two separate things.

Based on where you are in your exploration