Graduate studies at Western
Theoria 15 (1):33-58 (2000)
|Abstract||All accounts of causality that presuppose the propagation or transfer or some physical stuff to be an essential part of the causal relation rely for the force of their causal claims on a principle of conservation for that stuff. General Relativity does not permit the rigorous formulation of appropriate conservation principles. Consequently, in so far as General Relativity is considered and fundamental physical theory, such accounts of causality cannot be considered fundamental. The continued use of such accounts of causality ought not be proscribed, but justification is due from those who would use them|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Dominick A. Rizzi & Stig Andur Pedersen (1992). Causality in Medicine: Towards a Theory and Terminology. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 13 (3).
J. R. Lucas (1990). Spacetime and Electromagnetism: An Essay on the Philosophy of the Special Theory of Relativity. Oxford University Press.
Joel Hunter, Time Travel. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
M. Gregory Oakes (2004). Perdurance and Causal Realism. Erkenntnis 60 (2):205-227.
G. Hooft (2001). Obstacles on the Way Towards the Quantisation of Space, Time and Matter - and Possible Resolutions. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):157-180.
Roger Jones (1980). Is General Relativity Generally Relativistic? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 381.
Hasok Chang & Nancy Cartwright (1993). Causality and Realism in the EPR Experiment. Erkenntnis 38 (2):169 - 190.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #213,976 of 738,617 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,617 )
How can I increase my downloads?