Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
1161950 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences | 2012 | 8 Pages |
Abstract
The present paper deals with the tools that can be used to represent causation and to reason about it and, specifically, with their diversity. It focuses on so-called “causal probabilities”—that is, probabilities of effects given one of their causes—and critically surveys a recent paper in which Joyce (2010) argues that the values of these probabilities do not depend on one’s conception of causation. I first establish a stronger independence claim: I show that the very definition of causal probabilities is independent of one’s conception of causation. Second, I investigate whether causal probabilities indeed take the same values under their different possible definitions.
Related Topics
Life Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (General)
Authors
Isabelle Drouet,