Graduate studies at Western
Theoria 15 (1):11-31 (2000)
|Abstract||I defend the conserved quantity theory of causation against two objections: firstly, that to tie the notion of “cause” to conservation laws is impossible, circular or metaphysically counterintuitive; and secondly, that the conserved quantity theory entails an undesired notion of identity through time. My defence makes use of an important meta-philosophical distinction between empirical analysis and conceptual analysis. My claim is that the conserved quantity theory of causation must be understood primarily as an empirical, not a conceptual, analysis of causation|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Michael Esfeld, Review of Max Kistler, Causalité Et Lois de la Nature Paris: Vrin 1999, 311 Pages, FRF 198. [REVIEW]
Phil Dowe (2004). Causation and Misconnections. Philosophy of Science 71 (5):926-931.
Wesley C. Salmon (1997). Causality and Explanation: A Reply to Two Critiques. Philosophy of Science 64 (3):461-477.
Phil Dowe (2000). The Conserved Quantity Theory Defended. Theoria 15 (1):11-31.
Max Kistler (1998). Reducing Causality to Transmission. Erkenntnis 48 (1):1-25.
Phil Dowe (1995). Causality and Conserved Quantities: A Reply to Salmon. Philosophy of Science 62 (2):321-333.
Phil Dowe (2000). Physical Causation. Cambridge University Press.
Phil Dowe (1995). What's Right and What's Wrong with Transference Theories. Erkenntnis 42 (3):363 - 374.
Phil Dowe (1992). Wesley Salmon's Process Theory of Causality and the Conserved Quantity Theory. Philosophy of Science 59 (2):195-216.
Sungho Choi (2003). The Conserved Quantity Theory of Causation and Closed Systems. Philosophy of Science 70 (3):510-530.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #170,393 of 740,512 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,512 )
How can I increase my downloads?