CAUSATION

From Synoptic past paper 2012: 1. Discuss Humes views on causality. 2. Metaphysics attempts to provide a rational explanation for why things in nature are the way they are by seeking to give a causal account of how things come to be. Discuss and elucidate this statement. Is there a necessary connection between causes and their effects? Are there laws of nature? Give reasons for your answer. A brief introduction: What do we mean by causation? Causation is a relation that holds between two temporally simultaneous or successive events when the first event (the cause) brings about the other (the effect). According to David Hume, when we say of two types of object or event that X causes Y (e.g., fire causes smoke), we mean that (i) Xs are constantly conjoined with Ys, (ii) Ys follow Xs and not vice versa, and (iii) there is a necessary connection between Xs and Ys such that whenever an X occurs, a Y must follow. Unlike the ideas of contiguity and succession, however, the idea of necessary connection is subjective, in the sense that it derives from the act of contemplating objects or events that we have experienced as being constantly conjoined and succeeding one another in a certain order, rather than from any observable properties in the objects or events themselves. This idea is the basis of the classic problem of induction, which Hume formulated. Humes definition of causation is an example of a regularity analysis (Encyclopdia Britannica Online, 2013).

Hume correctly explains that Humans do not know the 'Necessary Connexion' between objects and thus do not know the relationship between cause and effect. This quite simply is the Problem of Causation - that until we know 'what exists' and the 'necessary connexions' between these things that exist, then it is impossible for Humanity to have certainty of knowledge. This then leads to the further Problem of Induction, for if we do not know the a priori cause of events then we have no Principles from which to logically deduce our conclusions. We are left simply observing that one event follows another and seems connected, but we do not know how or why, thus we must depend upon repeated observation (Induction) to determine the laws of Nature (the current state of Modern Physics) and hence tacitly assuming (without reason) that the future is like the past. It is simply a habit of thinking to connect two events which seem to occur in conjunction and necessarily assumes that the future will be like the past. (Geoff Haselhurst, 2012).

Useful links: http://www.library.utoronto.ca/see/SEED/Vol4-3/Hulswit.htm http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/ http://www.fountainmagazine.com/Issue/detail/Kant-on-Causality-A-Critical-Approach

Discussion points: Tracing Causation back to Aristotles Metaphysics: o The answer to Why? questions = the four causes Thomas Aquinas o God = final and efficient cause Modern Philosophy o A radical shift: rejection of formal and final cause = only efficient cause remains Empiricism - overview Humes account of causation Vs. Traditional metaphysics of causality o o Traditional view = necessary connection between cause and effect Hume the sceptic philosopher who harshly attacks metaphysics every idea has in its origin in experience (impressions) 2 kinds of impression: sensation and reflection Billiard ball example Contiguity + succession From experience we deduce causal patterns

Humes problem of induction: The supposition that the future resembles the past, is not founded on arguments of any kind, but is derived entirely from habit.(David Hume, 1737)

Kants answer to Humes sceptical view of causality o Causation is an apriori concept - all our experience is shaped by the category of causality o Everything in nature, as well in the inanimate as in the animated world, happens or is done according to rules, though we do not always know them....