more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
The dominant view is that causal laws are more basic than causal relations, with relations being logically supervenient on causal laws, and on properties and event relations; some, though, defend the singularist view, in which events alone can be related.
Gist of Idea
The dominant view is that causal laws are prior; a minority say causes can be explained singly
Source
E Sosa / M Tooley (Introduction to 'Causation' [1993], §1)
Book Ref
'Causation', ed/tr. Sosa,E. /Tooley,M. [OUP 1993], p.1
A Reaction
I am deeply suspicious about laws (see Idea 5470). I suspect that the laws are merely descriptions of the regularities that arise from the single instances of causation. We won't explain the single instances, but then laws don't 'explain' them either.
Related Idea
Idea 5470 The idea of laws of nature arose in the Middle Ages [Hall,AR, by Ellis]
8329 | Either causal relations are given in experience, or they are unobserved and theoretical [Sosa/Tooley] |
8324 | The problem is to explain how causal laws and relations connect, and how they link to the world [Sosa/Tooley] |
8328 | Causation isn't energy transfer, because an electron is caused by previous temporal parts [Sosa/Tooley] |
8327 | If direction of causation is just direction of energy transfer, that seems to involve causation [Sosa/Tooley] |
8325 | The dominant view is that causal laws are prior; a minority say causes can be explained singly [Sosa/Tooley] |
8330 | Are causes sufficient for the event, or necessary, or both? [Sosa/Tooley] |