Philosophy of Science 73 (3):261-276 (2006)
|Abstract||This paper proposes a revision of our understanding of causation that is designed to address what Hartry Field has suggested is the central problem in the metaphysics of causation today: reconciling Bertrand Russell’s arguments that the concept of causation can play no role in the advanced sciences with Nancy Cartwright’s arguments that causal concepts are essential to a scientific understanding of the world. The paper shows that Russell’s main argument is, ironically, very similar to an argument that Cartwright has put forward against the truth of universal laws of nature. The paper uses this insight to develop an account of causation that does justice to traditional views yet avoids the arguments of Russell.|
|Keywords||Causation Laws Russell Cartwright Forces|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Thomas M. Osborne Jr (2007). Rethinking Anscombe on Causation. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 81 (1):89-107.
David Spurrett (2001). Cartwright on Laws and Composition. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15 (3):253 – 268.
Barry Ward (2009). Cartwright, Forces, and Ceteris Paribus Laws. Southwest Philosophy Review 25 (1):55-62.
Jessica M. Wilson (2010). The Causal Argument Against Component Forces. Dialectica 63:525-554.
Antony Eagle (2007). Pragmatic Causation. In Huw Price & Richard Corry (eds.), Causation, Physics, and the Constitution of Reality: Russell's Republic Revisited. Oxford University Press.
Hartry Field (2003). Causation in a Physical World. In Michael J. Loux & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press.
Sheldon R. Smith (2000). Resolving Russell's Anti-Realism About Causation. The Monist 83 (2):274-295.
Added to index2009-04-07
Total downloads21 ( #58,746 of 549,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?