Hi Richard

I really need to check the precise terms of Hume's argument which I am a bit rusty about (I am out of my comfort zone on your topic).  But I thought I would ask another question first.

At the risk - probably the grave risk - of distorting your argument, I wondered if in fact you are trying to dispense with the notion of causation altogether? I mean, if one can argue on the basis of Michotte's experiments than subjects often infer causation when there is none (eg the big ball "chasing" the small ball example) perhaps you are suggesting that all perception of causation is questionable and that the very idea misleads us?

Apologies if this is way off target.

DA