Williamson, Jon Dispositional versus epistemic causality. Minds and Machines, 16 . pp. 259-276. (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)
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.
|Subjects:||B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)|
|Divisions:||Faculties > Humanities > School of European Culture and Languages|
|Depositing User:||Jon Williamson|
|Date Deposited:||29 Jun 2011 13:49|
|Last Modified:||02 Jun 2014 08:30|
|Resource URI:||https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/7361 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)|