Williamson, Jon (2006) Dispositional versus Epistemic Causality. Minds and Machines, 16 . pp. 259-276. ISSN 1572-8641. (doi:10.1007/s11023-006-9033-3) (The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided) (KAR id:7361)
The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided. | |
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-006-9033-3 |
Abstract
I put forward several desiderata that a philosophical theory of causality should satisfy: it should account for the objectivity of causality, it should underpin formalisms for causal reasoning, it should admit a viable epistemology, it should be able to cope with the great variety of causal claims that are made, and it should be ontologically parsimonious. I argue that Nancy Cartwright's dispositional account of causality goes part way towards meeting these criteria but is lacking in important respects. I go on to argue that my epistemic account, which ties causal relationships to an agent's knowledge and ignorance, performs well in the light of the desiderata. Such an account, I claim, is all we require from a theory of causality.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
DOI/Identification number: | 10.1007/s11023-006-9033-3 |
Subjects: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General) |
Divisions: | Divisions > Division of Arts and Humanities > School of Culture and Languages |
Depositing User: | Jon Williamson |
Date Deposited: | 29 Jun 2011 13:49 UTC |
Last Modified: | 16 Nov 2021 09:45 UTC |
Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/7361 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):