Causality and Medicine

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 1 (4):301-317 (1976)
The philosophers of science who viewed causality as a metaphysical headache were right. Yet when they concluded that it is of no scientific import and of less practical import, they were clearly in error. I say clearly because they thereby recommended that we replace cause by mere empirical correlation, which obviously will not do. Here is an obvious example which proves them in error without even touching upon the question of what science is.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/jmp/1.4.301
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,217
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
John Norton (2009). Is There an Independent Principle of Causality in Physics? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):475-486.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

86 ( #54,578 of 1,941,073 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

14 ( #62,212 of 1,941,073 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.