Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Lycophron, Naguib Mahfouz and George Molnar

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


4 ideas

26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 2. Types of cause
Singular causation is prior to general causation; each aspirin produces the aspirin generalization [Molnar]
     Full Idea: I take for granted the primacy of singular causation. A singular causal state of affairs is not constituted by a generalization. 'Aspirin relieves headache' is made true by 'This/that aspirin relieves this/that headache'.
     From: George Molnar (Powers [1998], 12.1)
     A reaction: [He cites Tooley for the opposite view] I wholly agree with Molnar, and am inclined to link it with the primacy of individual essences over kind essences.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 4. Naturalised causation
We should analyse causation in terms of powers, not vice versa [Molnar]
     Full Idea: Causal analyses of powers pre-empt the correct account of causation in terms of powers.
     From: George Molnar (Powers [1998], 4.2.3)
     A reaction: I think this is my preferred view. The crucial point is that powers are active, so one is not needing to add some weird 'causation' ingredient to a world which would otherwise be passive and inert. That is a relic from the interventions of God.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 7. Eliminating causation
We should analyse causation in terms of powers [Molnar]
     Full Idea: We should give up any causal analysis of powers, ..so we should try to analyse causation in terms of powers.
     From: George Molnar (Powers [1998], 8.5.3)
     A reaction: It may be hard to explain what powers are, or identify them, if you can't say that they cause things to happen. I am torn between Molnar's view, and the view that causation is primitive.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 9. General Causation / c. Counterfactual causation
Causal dependence explains counterfactual dependence, not vice versa [Molnar]
     Full Idea: The counterfactual analysis is open to the Euthyphro objection: it is causal dependence that explains any counterfactual dependence rather than vice versa.
     From: George Molnar (Powers [1998], 12.1)
     A reaction: I take views like the counterfactual analysis of causation to arise from empiricists who are bizarrely reluctant to adopt plausible best explainations (such as powers and essences).