Abstract:
It is a defense of the so called regularity thesis and the deductive-nomological model of causal explanation as the base of natural causation against objections brought forward recently by advocates of a singularity theory and a counterfactual theory of causation in philosophy and law, most of which are not new. Without regularities, it makes no sense to speak about necessary or sufficient conditions of any event. The logical correct determination of the relationship between a singular cause and its result is the so called NESS account, necessary element of a sufficient set. The counterfactual theory of causation and the so called but for-rule are logically wrong because they demand too much and fail in cases of pre-empted causes and double causation. Pre-empted causes are to be excluded by investigating the causal chain which is at some spot interrupted by the pre-empting cause. In law, we have to accept negative facts as causes in order to deal with omissions and cases of hindrance of rescuing events.
Puppe, Ingeborg, The Concept of Causation in the Law (March 9, 2016). Kahmen and Stepanians (eds), Critical Essays on ‘Causation and Responsibility’, 2013, p. 67-109.
First posted 2016-03-10 05:58:15
Leave a Reply