From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Nov 20 2002 - 10:04:50 MST
Lee Corbin wrote:
>Well, I heard from John Clark, and he has mellowed since the
>old days when he defiantly proclaimed "A causes B means
>exactly nothing more than A always comes before B". But
>since I was so thoroughly trounced by him (back in the old
>days) when I tried to argue against that, I will now defend
>it. Maybe I will lose again.
>
>gts writes
>...
>
>Lee
>
I would argue that causation is stronger than statistical-temporal
correlation. Causation also implies a model of how things happen,
wherein A causes B is interpreted. This is necessitated by occasions
where people agree on the observable facts, but differ in their
interpretations. (Even figuring out what the actual facts are can be
quite difficult, however, as people have a strong tendency to take the
name that they assign to an object as an actual reality, whereas it's
really a part of their modeling. The observables are actual sensory
inputs.)
-- -- Charles Hixson Gnu software that is free, The best is yet to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:15 MST