A causes B *means* B always comes after A

From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Thu Nov 21 2002 - 01:19:42 MST


"Charles Hixson" <charleshixsn@earthlink.net>

> I would argue that causation is stronger than
> statistical-temporal correlation. Causation
> also implies a model of how things happen,

That's true but I don't really think it's stronger or even basically
different, you're just saying the same thing in a more user friendly
fashion. If B always comes after A you can be sure that somebody will come
up with a model, a story where A and B have staring parts. It may not be a
very good story at first but it will get better and sometimes the stories
are so good they contain characters that nobody has ever seen yet but are
later observed in nature. Now that's a really good story.

People just demand stories, they'd even prefer crappy stories (The reason
there is something rather than nothing is that God made something) rather
than no story at all (I don't know).

          John K Clark jonkc@att.net



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:17 MST