Distinguishing necessary and sufficient conditions can be challenging to undergraduate logic and critical thinking students. Explaining J. L. Mackie’s notion of INUS conditions—insufficient but necessary parts of unnecessary but sufficient conditions—is an even more difficult concept to understand. It is helpful to have memorable examples that not only clarify the concept, but make it easy to remember. Law student turned stand-up comedian Demetri Martin uses necessary, sufficient, and INUS conditions to construct absurdist jokes. These jokes provide effective tools (...) for making Mackie’s notion understandable and memorable. (shrink)

permits a sound and rigorously definable notion of ‘originating cause’ or causa causans—a type of transition event—of an outcome event. Mackie has famously suggested that causes form a family of ‘inus’ conditions, where an inus condition is ‘an insufficient but non-redundant part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition’. In this essay the needed concepts of BST theory are developed in detail, and it is then proved that the causae causantes of a given outcome event have exactly the structure (...) of a set of Mackie inus conditions. The proof requires the assumption that there is no EPR-like ‘funny business’. This seems enough to constitute a theory of ‘causation’ in at least one of its many senses. Introduction The cement of the universe Preliminaries 3.1 First definitions and postulates 3.2 Ontology: propositions 3.3 Ontology: initial events 3.4 Ontology: outcome events 3.5 Ontology: transition events 3.6 Propositional language applied to events Causae causantes 4.1 Causae causantes are basic primary transition events 4.2 Causae causantes of an outcome chain 4.3 No funny business Causae causantes and inns and inus conditions 5.1 Inns conditions of outcome chains: not quite 5.2 Inns conditions of outcome chains 5.3 Inns conditions of scattered outcome events 5.4 Inus conditions for disjunctive outcome events 5.5 Inns and inus conditions of transition events Counterfactual conditionals Appendix: Tense and modal connectives in BST. (shrink)

Cet essai qui porte uniquement sur Politiques de l’amitié de Derrida soutient une thèse à la fois anti-kantienne et hyper-kantienne. D’une part, je montre que l’amitié ou l’amour véritable rompt avec la téléologie d’une « humanisation de l’être humain » qui conçoit l’amitié comme une fin morale. L’amour doit rompre avec la fin morale, car l’amour qui poursuit une fin morale utilise l’aimé comme un moyen en vue d’une fin. Cela rompt avec l’impératif moral de Kant. C’est hyper-kantien et en (...) fait nietzschéen, car la seule voie pour rompre avec les relations de moyens à fins est de tenir l’aimé le plus possible à distance de moi. (shrink)

Cases of overdetermination or preemption continue to play an important role in the debate about the proper interpretation of causal claims of the form "C was a cause of E". I argue that the best treatment of preemption cases is given by Mackie's venerable INUS account of causal claims. The Mackie account suffers, however, from problems of its own. Inspired by its ability to handle preemption, I propose a dramatic revision to the Mackie account – one that Mackie himself (...) would certainly have rejected – to solve these difficulties. The result is, I contend, a very attractive account of singular causal claims. (shrink)

In this paper, the ontological, terminological, epistemological, and ethical aspects of omission are considered in a coherent and balanced framework, based on the idea that there are omissions which are actions and omissions which are non-actions. In particular, we suggest that the approach to causation which best deals with omission is Mackie's INUS conditional proposal. We argue that omissions are determined partly by the ontological conditional structure of reality, and partly by the interests, beliefs, and values of observers. The (...) final upshot is that moral judgments involved in cases of omissions cannot be grounded on, but are the ground for judgments about what INUS conditions count as omissions. (shrink)

For a long time, regularity accounts of causation have virtually vanished from the scene. Problems encountered within other theoretical frameworks have recently induced authors working on causation, laws of nature, or methodologies of causal reasoning – as e.g. May (Kausales Schliessen. Eine Untersuchung über kausale Erklärungen und Theorienbildung. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, 1999), Ragin (Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), Graßhoff and May (Causal regularities. In W. Spohn, M. Ledwig, & M. Esfeld (Eds.), Current issues in (...) causation (pp. 85–114). Paderborn: Mentis, 2001), Swartz (The concept of physical law (2nd ed.). http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/physical-law/, 2003), Halpin (Erkenntnis, 58, 137–168, 2003) – to direct their attention back to regularity theoretic analyses. In light of the latest proposals of regularity theories, the paper at hand therefore reassesses the criticism raised against regularity accounts since the INUS theory of causation of Mackie (The cement of the universe. A study of causation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974). It is shown that most of these objections target strikingly over-simplified regularity theoretic sketches. By outlining ways to refute these objections it is argued that the prevalent conviction as to the overall failure of regularity theories has been hasty. (shrink)

Rani Lill Anjum and Stephen Mumford have recently defended a new kind of modality, which they call ‘dispositional modality’. The key reason to adopt dispositional modality, according to them, is that causes never necessitate their effects. Anjum and Mumford’s chief argument against causal necessitation makes use of what they call the ‘antecedent-strengthening test’ : C causally necessitates E iff C & φ causes E, for any possible φ. This test, they claim, fails in all cases of alleged causal necessitation. In (...) this paper we argue that the AS-test is not the mark of causal necessitation. First, we show that if the AS-test is taken as the mark of causal necessitation it leads to either an absurdity or to circularity. Second, we argue that, given the Mill/Mackie framework of causes as INUS conditions, apparent counterexamples to causal necessitation fail. (shrink)

Ascribing moral responsibility in collective action cases is notoriously difficult. After all, if my individual actions make no difference with regard to the prevention of climate change, the alleviation of poverty, or the outcome of national elections, why ought I to stop driving, donate money, or cast my vote? Neither consequentialist nor non-consequentialist moral theories have straightforward responses ready at hand. In this contribution, I present a new suggestion which, based on thoughts about causal overdetermination along the lines of Mackie’s (...) INUS account, aims to show that causally overdetermined collective action cases are morally arbitrary in a way that makes it possible to ascribe moral responsibility even if individual actions make no difference. (shrink)

We present a logic, $$\mathbf {ELI^r}$$ ELI r, for the discovery of deterministic causal regularities starting from empirical data. Our approach is inspired by Mackie’s theory of causes as INUS-conditions, and implements a more recent adjustment to Mackie’s theory according to which the left-hand side of causal regularities is required to be a minimal disjunction of minimal conjunctions. To derive such regularities from a given set of data, we make use of the adaptive logics framework. Our knowledge of deterministic (...) causal regularities is, as Mackie noted, most often gappy or elliptical. The adaptive logics framework is well-suited to explicate both the internal and the external dynamics of the discovery of such gappy regularities. After presenting $$\mathbf {ELI^r}$$ ELI r, we first discuss these forms of dynamics in more detail. Next, we consider some criticisms of the INUS-account and show how our approach avoids them, and we compare $$\mathbf {ELI^r}$$ ELI r with the CNA algorithm that was recently proposed by Michael Baumgartner. (shrink)

Madole & Harden describe how genetics can be used in a causal framework. We agree with many of their opinions but argue that comparing within-family designs to experiments is unnecessary and that the proposed influence of genetics on behavior can be better described as inus conditions.

A difference-making account of causality is proposed that is based on a counterfactual definition, but differs from traditional counterfactual approaches to causation in a number of crucial respects: it introduces a notion of causal irrelevance; it evaluates the truth-value of counterfactual statements in terms of difference-making; it renders causal statements background-dependent. On the basis of the fundamental notions 'causal relevance' and 'causal irrelevance', further causal concepts are defined including causal factors, alternative causes, and importantly inus-conditions. Problems and advantages of (...) the proposed account are discussed. Finally, it is shown how the account can shed new light on three classic problems in epistemology, the problem of induction, the logic of analogy, and the framing of eliminative induction. (shrink)

Two kinds of causal inference rules which are widely used by social scientists are investigated. Two conceptions of causation also widely used are explicated — the INUS and probabilistic conceptions of causation. It is shown that the causal inference rules which link correlation, a kind of partial correlation, and a conception of causation areinvalid. It is concluded anew methodology is required for causal inference.

A análise epistemológica das práticas das ciências da saúde vem se tornando mais presente no debate filosófico nas últimas décadas, e se torna premente diante do contexto dramático da pandemia em que atualmente vivemos. Para contribuir com a essa análise, o presente artigo apresenta uma introdução às temáticas da filosofia da medicina e da filosofia da epidemiologia, especialmente o exame do papel da causalidade, conceito fundamental para a compreensão da relação entre saúde e doença. A noção de causa INUS, (...) formulada pelo filósofo J. L. Mackie e adaptada para a epidemiologia por Kenneth Rothman, permite retratar com precisão as interações multicausais que cooperam para a alteração de um estado de saúde. Contudo, o modelo visual de Rothman não contempla conceitos importantes da epidemiologia, imprecisão que busco sanar com uma proposta de representação temporal do conjunto multicausal que, dentre outras coisas, facilita o planejamento de intervenções pontuais que visem a impedir a instalação de uma doença. A delimitação do conjunto causal também é posta em questão, uma vez que a perspectiva multicausal não delimita intrinsecamente qualquer critério acerca de onde finalizar a seleção de fatores causais. Aponto para a manipulabilidade como a abordagem própria das ciências da saúde para a seleção dos fatores nos quais intervir, e que o reconhecimento dessa perspectiva é importante para a própria compreensão filosófica da causalidade. (shrink)

Intentionality occurs in connectionist nets among those traits of the nets that scientists call flaws. This label has obscured for philosophers the fact that the naturalistic basis of intentionality has been discovered. I show this while staying on our profession's common ground of discourse about ancient philosophy. In the "Theaetetus", Plato invokes a homunculus to explain perceptual misrecognition, and in "On Memory and Recollection", Aristotle invokes a mental operation of disregarding in order to overcome the extraneous determinateness of mental images. (...) I develop a connectionist alternative to images that does not invoke a homunculus or spurious mental operations. I describe in detail an ultra-simple Hopfield net that provides an inus (indispensable part of a sufficient) condition for misrecognition. In addition, it exhibits properties that make it an inus condition for two marks of the intentionality of singular terms, namely, failures of existential generalization and of intersubstitutability of names. I also define the sense of a singular term. (shrink)

It is the aim of the present article to show that, on the one hand, John L. Mackie's concept of an INUS condition lends itself to a modern reconstruction of Aristotle's theory of accidental causation which brings the indeterministic character of this theory to the fore, and that, on the other hand, in the light of this theory the concept of an INUS condition can be enriched by distinguishing between synchronic INUS conditions and diachronic ones. This distinction, (...) which Mackie fails to make, proves to coincide with the distinction between two different types of accidental causes recognized by Aristotle. German Im vorliegenden Aufsatz wird zu zeigen versucht, daß man einerseits mit Hilfe des von John L. Mackie eingeführten Begriffs der INUS-Bedingung die Aristotelische Theorie der akziden tellen Verursachung in einer Weise rekonstruieren kann, die deutlich den indeterministischen Charakter dieser Theorie erkennen läßt, und daß man andererseits im Lichte dieser Theorie dem Begriff der INUSBedingung einen differenzierteren Inhalt geben kann, indem man zwischen synchronen und diachronen INUS-Bedingungen unterscheidet. Diese Unterscheidung, die man bei Mackie vermißt, erweist sich als deckungsgleich mit der Unterscheidung zwischen zwei verschiedenen Arten akziden teller Ursachen, die sich bei Aristoteles findet. (shrink)

Some scientists and philosophers claimed that there is a converse to multiple realizability. While a given higher-level property can be realized by different lower-level properties (multiple realizability), a given lower-level property can in turn serve to realize different higher-level properties (this converse I dubbed the unfortunately obscure "constructival plasticity" to emphasize the constructive metaphysics involved in this converse to multiple realizability). I began by defining multiple realizabilty in a formal way. (Looking back, one point of interest is that I defined (...) modally weak and strong versions of realization, which is relevant to later views about contingent versus necessitarian grounding.) I then turned to the relation in question. By my analysis, for the converse claim to be true, a lower-level property G1 that realizes a higher-level F must be taken in conjunction with some other base condition G2 so that a difference in G2 allows G1 to determine some other higher-level property E but not F (otherwise there would be violations of supervenience). The realization law thus has the form: (G1 & G2) => F. As such, the base property G1 is insufficient by itself to produce F. It is an insufficient but necessary part of a sufficient condition. I also point out that this makes the realization base property an INUS condition, if combined with multiple realizability. Specifically, if F is multiply realized by properties other than the pair G1 and G2, then G1 is an insufficient but necessary part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition. This is just the first clear and explicit INUS condition view of realization in the literature. Looking back, this converse is also relevant to later views, such as Robert Wilson's view about metaphysically contextual realization. (shrink)

The Minimal Theory of Causation, presented in Graßhoff and May, 2001, aspires to be a version of a regularity analysis of causation able to correctly predict our causal intuitions. In my article, I will argue that it is unsuccessful in this respect. The second aim of the paper will be to defend Hitchcock’s proposal concerning divisions of causal relations against criticism made, in Jakob, 2006 on the basis of the Minimal Theory of Causation.

The account of causal regularities in the influential INUS theory of causation has been refined in the recent developments of the regularity approach to causation and of the Boolean methods for inference of deterministic causal structures. A key element in the refinement is to strengthen the minimality or non-redundancy condition in the original INUS account. In this paper, we argue that the Boolean framework warrants a further strengthening of the minimality condition. We motivate our stronger condition by showing, (...) first, that a rationale for strengthening the original minimality condition in the INUS theory is also applicable to our proposal to go further, and second, that the new element of the stronger condition is a counterpart to a well-established minimality condition for probabilistic causal models. We also compare the various minimality conditions in terms of the difference-making criteria they imply and argue for the criterion implied by our condition. Finally, we show that putative counterexamples to our proposal can be addressed in the same way that the Boolean theorists defend the current minimality conditions in their framework. (shrink)

Two kinds of causal inference rules which are widely used by social scientists are investigated. Two conceptions of causation also widely used are explicated -- the INUS and probabilistic conceptions of causation. It is shown that the causal inference rules which link correlation, a kind of partial correlation, and a conception of causation are invalid. It is concluded a new methodology is required for causal inference.

This article examines Leibniz's philosophy of causation with the aim of clarifying how causes are related to their effects. I argue that, much like J. L. Mackie's INUS conditions, Leibnizian causes are members of complex causal conditions. More precisely, Leibniz identifies causes with elements of complex causal conditions, where the complex condition as a whole is sufficient for the effect, and the cause is a necessary part of that condition. This conception of causation is able to incorporate Leibniz's many (...) other definitions of ‘cause’, thereby resolving what appear to be internal inconsistencies in his philosophy of science. Introduction The ingredients of causation Causes and conditions Causes as INUS conditions Conclusion. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reasons CountJohn Z. Sadler (bio)Keywordscriminality, mental disorder, responsibilityAs a fourth-year psychiatry resident many years ago, I encountered a patient on the psychiatric emergency service whom I have never forgotten, because my experience with him jelled a distinction about the importance of explaining violence. Brought in involuntarily by the police for being “dangerous,” he was a fearsome visage: six feet four, shaven head, angular jaw, the triangular build of an (...) athlete, a history of paranoid schizophrenia and violence. I’ll call him Mr. Big. His court order papers explained that he had threatened to kill his brother-in-law.Mr. Big’s story, in brief, was that he was a veteran on disability, and that he had purchased, some years ago, a small home using his wits and savings from his pension. Although he admitted that he could be, and had been, violent off his medications, he explained that he had been taking his medicines reliably for two years and had never had any trouble over that period—until now. His brother-in-law, according to Mr. Big, had moved in and appropriated his home while the patient was away on a trip to see a friend, and now refused to leave, to the chagrin of both the patient and his sister. Mr. Big had threatened to kill the brother-in-law in indignation with the in-law’s behavior. The brother-in-law never called or appeared. The sister, it turns out, corroborated the story, and after an examination revealed only minimal idiosyncrasies of thought and affect, the patient was referred for legal counseling, released, and the family was warned. We all hoped that justice could be found peacefully.Wilson and Adshead emphasize in their thoughtful discussion of violence and psychiatric symptoms that the explanation for the violent act is crucial to assessing its pertinence to mental disorder. What was elegant in Mr. Big’s case was that the motivation for threats of violence was proximate, morally comprehensible, corroborated by at least one other, insightful, and most of all, clear-cut. Although these features for distinguishing violence due to normative motivation versus violence due to mental disorder are addressed by Wilson and Adshead, they would agree that, unfortunately, these tools of proximity, comprehensibility, ordinariness of motivation, insight, and corroboration are often absent, unobtainable, or inadequate.But these considerations are helpful in ruling out violence as symptom, which is the lesson Mr. Big taught me—reasons count. Wilson and Adshead go on to critically consider the features that may be positive identifications for violence as symptom. With “deplorability,” they identify a feature of the violence that exceeds what I have termed “normative motivation,” which defies our empathic ability to understand the perpetrator’s point of view. However, deplorable events are perpetrated by soldiers and police in their socially approved work, so even deplorability has limits in its utility. Indeed, social psychologists’ research has shown, as Susan Fiske and colleagues put it, “Virtually anyone can be aggressive if sufficiently [End Page 73] provoked, stressed, disgruntled, or hot” (Fiske et al. 2004, 1482). Also, like “normative” motivation, deplorability is culture—and politically—relative, another limit to its utility.Even with complex causality, the INUS approach of Mackie’s offers a way to link symptoms to a more complex causal network while admitting that the social components of the causal network may exhibit particular moral and pragmatic interests. For medicine, the INUS approach is sensible and coherent with biomedicine’s intellectual culture of multifactorial causation of disease. However, criminal culpability in law is usually a dichotomous decision; any taint of choice links the offender to the whole culpability package (Sadler 2002).The conclusion one is left with is that no failsafe tools permit us to distinguish violence provoked by mental disorder versus normatively motivated violence. I tend to agree that, for some cases, we will never be able to broker the distinction between disordered violence versus nondisordered violence. My pessimism is based on the technical limitations of parsing mental life retrospectively in a way that will always allow for the kind of clear-cut distinction described in the case of Mr. Big (Sadler 2002). That is, how, after the... (shrink)

This article is an attempt to clarify the idea that narratives cohere by representing stories. Stories are causally related in the way proposed by Noël Carroll, i.e., the events and states constitute necessary conditions or sufficient conditions or INUS-conditions of each other. Then, a general concept of propositional coherence is suggested. It is based on Nelson Goodman's and Joseph Ullian's ideas about unitary formulas. Narrative coherence is defined as the propositional understanding of a text (in the wide sense, including (...) non-verbal narratives) that constitutes one unitary string built upon conditional relations, i.e., relations between individuals matching Carroll's types of conditions. (shrink)

This article is an attempt to clarify the idea that narratives cohere by representing stories. Stories are causally related in the way proposed by Noël Carroll, i.e., the events and states constitute necessary conditions or sufficient conditions or INUS-conditions of each other. Then, a general concept of propositional coherence is suggested. It is based on Nelson Goodman's and Joseph Ullian's ideas about unitary formulas. Narrative coherence is defined as the propositional understanding of a text (in the wide sense, including (...) non-verbal narratives) that constitutes one unitary string built upon conditional relations, i.e., relations between individuals matching Carroll's types of conditions. (shrink)

The distinction between killing and letting die has been a controversial element in arguments about the morality of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The killing/letting die distinction is based on causation of death. However, a number of causal factors come into play in any death; it is impossible to state a complete cause of death. I argue that John Mackie’s analysis of causation in terms of ‘inus factors,’ insufficient but nonredundant parts of unnecessary but sufficient conditions, helps us to see (...) that moral responsibility for death cannot rest on causation alone. In specifying the cause of death, some factors can be considered alternatively as either causal factors or merely parts of the presupposed background conditions. If a factor is moved from the background field into the causal field, the result is a changed background field. Comparisons of cases of killing and letting die often do just this; hence, the cases depend on different presuppositions and the causation cannot be directly compared. Moral judgments determine how to apportion factors to the causal and background fields. (shrink)

It is argued that it is very hard to analyse causation in such a way that prevents everything from causing everything else. This is particularly true if we assume that the causal relation is transitive, for it all too often happens that causal chains that we wish to keep separate pass through common intermediate events. It is also argued that treating causes as aspects of events, rather than the events themselves, will not solve this problem. This is because aspects have (...) to be highly disjunctive, and disjunctive conditions tend to undermine causal connections, a fact that is most clearly seen when causation is analysed in terms of INUS conditions. It is concluded that reductive analyses of causation do not work, and that transitivity can only be guaranteed in cases where the elements of the causal chain constitute an independently understood causal process. (shrink)

It is a crucial issue for history to determine a cause or a causal relation between two events. The regularity theory of causation is one of the most popular approach to this problem. The paper analyzes mainly how this approach deals with the determination of a causal condition and with the choice of the main cause from the remaining causal conditions. It examines also Mackie’s conception of cause as an INUS condition, which is in fact only one version of (...) the regularity theory. The paper not only outlines and illustrates these approaches, using a concrete causal statments, but also presents the criticism of their shortcomings. It points to their difficulties springing from their inability to distinguish between the laws and accidental generalizations. This is important, because a genuine causal relation cannot be based on the second type of statments. (shrink)

Eine Deduktion resp. eine logisch gültige Implikation ist Stephan Körner zufolge relevant gdw keine Formelkomponente salva validitate, d.h. unter Bewahrung der Gültigkeit, durch ihre Negation ersetzt werden kann. In der folgenden Arbeit wird 1. dieses Kriterium philosophisch-grundlagentheoretisch diskutiert, 2. in eine präzise Formulierung übergeführt; 3. wird gezeigt, wie eine Reihe unterschiedlicher Relevanzkriterien sich einheitlich auf das Körner-Kriterium zurückführen lassen, und 4. werden wissenschaftstheoretische Anwendungen des Körner-Kriteriums am Beispiel des D-N-Systematisierungsbegriffs, des Begriffs der Theorienbewährung, des Mackieschen Ursachebegriffs als Inus-Bedingung und (...) des probabilistischen Systematisierungsbegriffs demonstriert. (shrink)

We present a logic, \, for the discovery of deterministic causal regularities starting from empirical data. Our approach is inspired by Mackie’s theory of causes as INUS-conditions, and implements a more recent adjustment to Mackie’s theory according to which the left-hand side of causal regularities is required to be a minimal disjunction of minimal conjunctions. To derive such regularities from a given set of data, we make use of the adaptive logics framework. Our knowledge of deterministic causal regularities is, (...) as Mackie noted, most often gappy or elliptical. The adaptive logics framework is well-suited to explicate both the internal and the external dynamics of the discovery of such gappy regularities. After presenting \, we first discuss these forms of dynamics in more detail. Next, we consider some criticisms of the INUS-account and show how our approach avoids them, and we compare \ with the CNA algorithm that was recently proposed by Michael Baumgartner. (shrink)

In the past years, the relevance of Thomas Aquinas's theory of cognition for contemporary debates on epistemology has been widely discussed. That theory claims that mind and world are formally identical and that this relationship overcomes various problems associated with scepticism concerning mental representation. The proposal, however, is grounded on the idea that the world can act on the mind through a relation of formal causation. This thesis attempts to develop a Thomistic theory of formal causation which may be suitable (...) for a realist account of mental representation and which may meet the requirements prompted by current discussions. The suggested view is grounded on Aquinas's metaphysics, according to which the world is constituted of substances. The claim that change is possible since substances are hylomorphically constituted is defended. Aquinas's claim that some substances have forms which may act independently of matter is also supported. The paradigmatic examples are human souls, i.e. the forms of human beings, whose higher cognitive capacity, i.e. thinking, can be in principle carried on without the need of any material organ. A Thomistic theory of causation is subsequently proposed. It is argued that hylomorphism explains the distinction among four species of causes. Aquinas's attempt to explain causal relations conditionally is developed along the lines suggested by John Mackie's INUS conditional analysis. Jaegwon Kim's implementation of Mackie's proposal through an object-based metaphysics of events is then adapted to the hylomorphical account of substances. On these grounds, a theory of formal causation can be proposed and applied to Aquinas's theory of mental representation. The ensuing proposal is offered not in the spirit of historical exegesis but as a substantive philosophical account and it is Thomistic only in the broad sense that it is built on Aquinas's metaphysics and is consistent with his claims on causation. (shrink)

Eine Deduktion resp. eine logisch gültige Implikation ist Stephan Körner zufolge relevant gdw keine Formelkomponente salva validitate, d.h. unter Bewahrung der Gültigkeit, durch ihre Negation ersetzt werden kann. In der folgenden Arbeit wird 1. dieses Kriterium philosophisch-grundlagentheoretisch diskutiert, 2. in eine präzise Formulierung übergeführt; 3. wird gezeigt, wie eine Reihe unterschiedlicher Relevanzkriterien sich einheitlich auf das Körner-Kriterium zurückführen lassen, und 4. werden wissenschaftstheoretische Anwendungen des Körner-Kriteriums am Beispiel des D-N-Systematisierungsbegriffs, des Begriffs der Theorienbewährung, des Mackieschen Ursachebegriffs als Inus-Bedingung und (...) des probabilistischen Systematisierungsbegriffs demonstriert. (shrink)

Eine Deduktion resp. eine logisch gültige Implikation ist Stephan Körner zufolge relevant gdw keine Formelkomponente salva validitate, d.h. unter Bewahrung der Gültigkeit, durch ihre Negation ersetzt werden kann. In der folgenden Arbeit wird 1. dieses Kriterium philosophisch-grundlagentheoretisch diskutiert, 2. in eine präzise Formulierung übergeführt; 3. wird gezeigt, wie eine Reihe unterschiedlicher Relevanzkriterien sich einheitlich auf das Körner-Kriterium zurückführen lassen, und 4. werden wissenschaftstheoretische Anwendungen des Körner-Kriteriums am Beispiel des D-N-Systematisierungsbegriffs, des Begriffs der Theorienbewährung, des Mackieschen Ursachebegriffs als Inus-Bedingung und (...) des probabilistischen Systematisierungsbegriffs demonstriert. (shrink)

A formal, logical, theory of events is developed and used as the basis for a definition of causation and to provide a pragmatics for causal counterfactuals. The theory begins with with a logical formalization of events as represented in the planner strips. The resulting inertial theories include a common sense law of inertia and their pragmatics is based on the principle of chronological minimization. The theory of events is then developed by removing some of the simplifying assumptions of the strips (...) representation. To begin with the assumption that events always succeed, given that their preconditions are true when they occur, is dropped. Instead a common sense law of change is introduced with the effect that events normally succeed but may fail if some qualification (some unusual or unexpected condition) arises. The pragmatics of the resulting causal theories is provided by refining the pragmatics of inertial theories. In particular, where there is a conflict between change and inertia, preference is given to change. The resulting defeasibility of events makes it possible to remove the strips assumption that only one event occurs at any given time; as conflicting events now result in failure rather than inconsistency. However it is desirable to provide a means for adjudicating between conflicting events. Consequently the theory is extended so that qualification preferences can be specified and the pragmatics are refined accordingly. A further strips assumption is that the effects of an event are invariant. In order to remove this assumption a distinction is drawn between primary events, events of the kind described above, and secondary events. Secondary events are invoked by primary events in appropriate contexts, they are causally dependent on primary events and when successful produce the additional, variant, effects of the primary events which invoke them. As a result, both the context-dependent effects of events (their ramifications) and non-deterministic events (events whose outcome is uncertain) can be represented. The theory of primary and secondary events is then used as the basis for a definition of causation which can be seen as providing a formal account of Mackie's definition of a cause as an inus condition. A major theme of this paper is the conflict between the opposite but complementary principles of change and inertia. For much of the paper the emphasis is on restricting the effects of inertia and favouring change. The resulting imbalance becomes unnatural when considering the combined effects of several events. However the definition of causation makes it possible to state a law of change and inertia, which is used to regulate change and inertia and thus ensure a proper balance between them: while caused change is preferred to inertia, inertia is preferred to uncaused change. The theory is then used to provide a pragmatics for causal counterfactuals, thereby extending the representation of actual causal reasoning to counterfactual causal reasoning. This is illustrated by the use of causal counterfactuals in order to obtain explanations. (shrink)

The Rockefeller Foundation played a key role inthe shift from `isolationism' to globalism inUS foreign policy between 1939 and 1945. TheFoundation utilised its considerable financialresources in a conscious and systematic attemptto assist official policymakers and academicsto build a new globalist consensus within thestate and public opinion. The article testsfour theoretical models that have been used todescribe Rockefeller initiatives. It concludesthat a Gramscian analysis provides the mosthelpful way of understanding the Foundation'srole in American foreign affairs.

A participatory rural appraisal inthree West African countries examined thepossibility for replacing chemical pesticidesto control locusts and grasshoppers with abiological control method based on anindigenous fungal pathogen. The fungus iscurrently being tested at different sites inthe Sahel and in the humid tropics of WestAfrica. Structured group interviews, individualdiscussions, and field visits, were used toobtain farmers' perceptions of locust andgrasshoppers as crop pests, their quantitativeestimation of crop losses, and theirwillingness to pay for locust control. Farmersas well as plant protection officers generallyperceived (...) locusts and grasshoppers as importantpests that cause significant damage. Farmerswere aware of some of the risks of the use ofchemical pesticides, but not of the potentialalternatives. The use of the fungus in anoil-formulation and standard Ultra Low Volume(ULV) equipment was demonstrated, and theresults discussed with farmers. Theirimpressions of biological control werefavorable, and they expressed an interest inusing the technology. Farmers' expressedwillingness to pay for locust control is small,but not negligible. Locusts and grasshoppersare very visible pests and thus amenable topressure from farmers to local administrators,as well as by farmers' relatives in the city onthe national government. Therefore, politicalpressure for locust control is strong, althoughnational governments spend little on it,depending mostly on foreign donors. Donors areincreasingly worried about the environmentaleffect of the large amounts of chemicalpesticides used on locust control, and arepushing for more benign alternatives. Theresults of the present survey indicate thatthere may be a potential market for abiopesticide against grasshoppers and locustson cash crops in the humid areas. The potentialmarket in the Sahel depends on a reduction ofcosts or a subsidy of its price. This subsidycould be justified by the expected reduction inenvironmental and health costs when replacingchemical pesticides. Since donors are thecurrent purchasers of chemical pesticides forthe Sahel, they would also be expected to beinvolved in the purchase of the biologicalproduct. (shrink)