Hitchcock (Synthese 97:335–364, 1993) argues that the ternary probabilistic theory of causality meets two problems due to the problem of disjunctive factors, while arguing that the unanimity probabilistic theory of causality, which is founded on the binary contrast, does not meet them. Hitchcock also argues that only the ternary theory conveys the information about complex relations of causal relevance. In this paper, I show that Eells’ solution (Probabilistic causality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991), which is founded on the unanimity theory, meet the two problems. I also show that the unanimity theory too reveals complex relations of causal relevance. I conclude that the two probabilistic theories of causality carve up the same causal structure in two formally different and conceptually consistent ways. Hitchcock’s ternary theory inspires several major philosophers (Maslen, Causation and counterfactuals, pp. 341–357. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2004; Schaffer, Philos Rev 114, 297–328, 2005; Northcott, Phil Stud 139, 111–123, 2007; Hausman, The place of probability in science: In honor of Eelleys Eells (1953–2006), pp. 47–64, Springer, Dordrecht, 2010) who have recently developed the ternary theory or the quaternary theory. This paper leads them to reconsider the relation between the ternary theory and the binary theory.
Quality & Quantity – Springer Journals
Published: Aug 18, 2012
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud