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 The principle of nondistinct sustaining causes fails to adequately capture intuitions about causes of disease

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A counterexample exists in which the principle does not align with intuitions about disease causation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A good causal condition must align with intuitions about what causes disease
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The INUS condition framework (Mackie 1974) requires causes to be insufficient but necessary parts of sufficient conditions, not mere background sustainers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sustaining causes that are non-distinct fail to meet the INUS criterion because they are not identifiable as discrete insufficient-but-necessary parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A causal principle that cannot identify discrete causal contributors cannot distinguish pathological from normal biological states, undermining disease classification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Broadbent's epidemiological account of causation requires that disease causes be contrastively specifiable against a reference population baseline.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Non-distinct sustaining causes, by definition, lack the contrastive specificity needed to explain why one individual develops disease while another does not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without contrastive explanatory power, a causal principle cannot ground the counterfactual dependency relationships that Hart and Honoré identify as essential to medical causation.
      ?

      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.