During the reading for this week's discussion I found that the section on criteria for cause and effect was very interesting. Epstein states that there are certain criteria to go by when using cause and effect with claims.
The cause happened (The claim describing it is true.)
The effect happened (The claim describing it is true.)
The cause precedes the effect it is (nearly) impossible for the cause to happen (be true) and the effect not to happen (be false), given the normal conditions.
The cause makes a difference-if the cause had not happened (been true) the effect would not have happened (been true).
There is no common cause.
I feel that this criteria really helps someone out if they are confused as to how to use it when making a claim, and yet on the other hand it could be quite confusing to others. I think that if people took the time to really think about the criteria it would really help. Without this criteria I think I would have had more trouble understanding how to use cause and effect with claims.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This section was the same one I wrote about. I agree with you when you recognize that having the criteria of a cause and effect argument listed makes understanding it a whole lot simpler. I also agree that looking over the criteria can help people understand how to structure a cause and effect argument, as the section breaks the rules down, making it easy to follow and replicate in an example.
ReplyDeleteI also find it interesting that Epstein includes this right before the examples at the end. I guess he wants us to actually be as confused as possible before he makes it easier to understand.