Philosophy of Science 56 (2):341-347 (1989)
In "Events and Causality" Mark Steiner argues that though Bertrand Russell was right to claim that the laws of physics do not express causal relations, nevertheless, Russell was wrong to suppose that therefore causality plays no role in physics. I argue that Steiner misses the point of Russell's argument for the first of these claims, and because of this Steiner's argument against the second fails to controvert it. Steiner fails to see that Russell's argument against causation, is in fact an argument against the existence of causal directionality or asymmetry. Steiner gives no reason to suppose physical theory requires this asymmetry after all
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Pragmatic Causation.Antony Eagle - 2007 - In Huw Price & Richard Corry (eds.), Causation, Physics, and the Constitution of Reality: Russell's Republic Revisited. Oxford University Press.
Is There an Independent Principle of Causality in Physics?John Norton - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):475-486.
Steiner Versus Wittgenstein: Remarks on Differing Views of Mathematical Truth.Charles Sayward - 2005 - Theoria 20 (3):347-352.
Causation, Physics, and the Constitution of Reality: Russell's Republic Revisited.Huw Price & Richard Corry (eds.) - 2006 - Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads195 ( #21,848 of 2,168,640 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #346,816 of 2,168,640 )
How can I increase my downloads?