Abstract
Schaffer proposes a new account of probabilistic causation that synthesizes the probability-raising and process-linkage views on causation. The driving idea of Schaffer's account is that, although an effect does not invariably depend on its cause, a process linked to the effect does. In this paper, however, I will advance counterexamples to Schaffer's account and then demonstrate that Schaffer's possible responses to them do not work. Finally, I will argue that my counterexamples suggest that the driving idea of Schaffer's account is misdirected.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 81-91 |
Number of pages | 11 |
Journal | Australasian Journal of Philosophy |
Volume | 85 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2007 |