Causes As Difference‐Makers For Processes

It is natural to think of causes as difference-makers. What exact difference causes make, however, is an open question. In this paper, I argue that the right way of understanding difference-making is in terms of causal processes: causes make a difference to a causal process that leads to the effect. I will show that this way of understanding difference-making nicely captures the distinction between causing an outcome and helping determine how the outcome happens and, thus, explains why causation is not transitive. Moreover, the theory handles tricky cases that are problematic for competing accounts of difference-making

Freier Wille und Naturgesetze: Überlegungen zum Konsequenzargument

In this paper, we argue that the Consequence Argument relies on empirical premises. In particular, we show how the argument depends upon assumptions about the character of the laws of nature

Structure, geometry and formation of brittle discontinuities in anisotropic crystalline rocks of the Central Gotthard Massif, Switzerland

Abstract.: Spatial occurrence, structural architecture and formation of brittle fault zones and joints are investigated by outcrop observations, scanline mapping, and light- and scanning electron microscopy in an anisotropic crystalline rock mass (e.g. granites, para-gneisses and schists) of the central Gotthard massif in the Swiss Alps. The analysis presented illustrates that several pre-fault anisotropic features (i.e. dykes, ductile shear zones, foliation and presumably a pre-existing meso-scale fracture set) control the nucleation and propagation of brittle faults. Three sets of brittle fault zones striking NE-SW, NNE-SSW and WNWESE can be distinguished. They formed through cataclasis at temperatures below 300°C, and were activated predominately in a strike-slip regime. Up to five joint sets were mapped and characterized according to orientation, frequency, spacing and formation. Finally a regional fan structure was established in the Gotthard Pass area, encompassing the main foliation, steeply dipping joints and brittle fault zones, each of which shows the same orientation and location of the symmetry plane (NE-SW orientated

Causes As Difference‐Makers For Processes

It is natural to think of causes as difference-makers. What exact difference causes make, however, is an open question. In this paper, I argue that the right way of understanding difference-making is in terms of causal processes: causes make a difference to a causal process that leads to the effect. I will show that this way of understanding difference-making nicely captures the distinction between causing an outcome and helping determine how the outcome happens and, thus, explains why causation is not transitive. Moreover, the theory handles tricky cases that are problematic for competing accounts of difference-making

Causation, physics, and fit

Our ordinary causal concept seems to fit poorly with how our best physics describes the world. We think of causation as a time-asymmetric dependence relation between relatively local events. Yet fundamental physics describes the world in terms of dynamical laws that are, possible small exceptions aside, time symmetric and that relate global time slices. My goal in this paper is to show why we are successful at using local, time-asymmetric models in causal explanations despite this apparent mismatch with fundamental physics. In particular, I will argue that there is an important connection between time asymmetry and locality, namely: understanding the locality of our causal models is the key to understanding why the physical time asymmetries in our universe give rise to time asymmetry in causal explanation. My theory thus provides a unified account of why causation is local and time asymmetric and thereby enables a reply to Russell’s famous attack on causation

The Asymmetry of Counterfactual Dependence

A certain type of counterfactual is thought to be intimately related to causation, control, and explanation. The time asymmetry of these phenomena therefore plausibly arises from a time asymmetry of counterfactual dependence. But why is counterfactual dependence time asymmetric? The most influential account of the time asymmetry of counterfactual dependence is David Albert’s account, which posits a new, time-asymmetric fundamental physical law, the so-called “past hypothesis.” Albert argues that the time asymmetry of counterfactual dependence arises from holding fixed the past hypothesis when evaluating counterfactuals. In this paper, I argue that Albert’s account misconstrues the time asymmetry of counterfactual dependence

Fundamentality and Time's Arrow

The distribution of matter in our universe is strikingly time asymmetric. Most famously, the Second Law of Thermodynamics says that entropy tends to increase toward the future but not toward the past. But what explains this time-asymmetric distribution of matter? In this paper, I explore the idea that time itself has a direction by drawing from recent work on grounding and metaphysical fundamentality. I will argue that positing such a direction of time, in addition to time-asymmetric boundary conditions (such as the so-called "past hypothesis"), enables a better explanation of the thermodynamic asymmetry than is available otherwise

Causation and Other Asymmetries in Time

We tend to think that the past brings about, produces, or shapes the future but not vice versa. Yet, most candidates for the fundamental physical laws are time-symmetric: these laws determine the evolution of the world in the forward direction, but they equally determine its evolution in the backward direction. I argue that, in light of this lawful time-symmetry, causation itself is bi-directional, that is, causation runs forwards but it also runs backwards. This view might sound absurd, but it follows from taking fundamental physics seriously. I argue that causation is law-governed, and so the time-symmetry of the laws grounds causation in both temporal directions. Moreover, my bi-directional view of causation is compatible with our experience. In fact, it provides a deeper understanding than previously had of why we can control the future but not the past and why scientific explanations are time-asymmetric.Doctor of Philosoph

Doing Otherwise in a Deterministic World

An influential version of the Consequence argument, the most famous argument for the incompatibility of free will and determinism, goes as follows: For an agent to be able to do otherwise, there has to be a possible world with the same laws and the same past as her actual world in which she does otherwise. However, if the actual world is deterministic, there is no such world. Hence, no agent in a deterministic world can ever do otherwise. In this paper, I discuss a recent version of this argument due to Christopher Franklin: the ‘No Opportunity argument’. I argue that the No Opportunity argument overgeneralizes. If its premises were true, things would be obstacles to doing otherwise that have nothing to do with determinism and that intuitively are not obstacles

Die Kavalleriewestern John Fords

Der amerikanische Filmregisseur John Ford (1894-1972) gilt als einer der bedeutendsten Künstler des Mediums. In seiner langen, über 5 Jahrzehnte währenden Karriere in Hollywood schuf er Meisterweke wie "The Searchers", "Stagecoach", "Young Mr. Lincoln" "They Were Expendable", "The Quiet Man" oder "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance". Er gewann sechs Regie-Oscars, und machte John Wayne zum grössten Kinostar seiner Zeit. Einem breitem Publikum bekannt ist der Regisseur durch seine Westernfilme, speziell durch diejenigen, die die US-Kavallerie thematisieren. Die Kavallerie, die Ford liebte, symbolisiert für ihn menschliche und kulturelle Werte, die er in allen seinen Filmen ständig thematisierte und variierte. Von seinem ersten Film mit Kavallerie, "Stagecoach" von 1939 bis zu seinem letzten Western, "Cheyenne Autumn" aus dem Jahr 1964, blieb er seinen bevorzugten Motiven von Familie und Gemeinschaft, Heldentum, Opferbereitschaft, dem Idealbild des Militärs als Familienersatz sowie der Gegensätzlichkeit von wilder Natur und Zivilisation treu. Aber:die Wertigkeit dieser thematischen Motive seiner Filme ist, wie der herrschende Zeitgeist, einem Wandel unterlaufen. Anhand dieses Wandels, stellvertretend dargestellt duch die sich verändernde Darstellung der Kavallerie in den Filmen Fords, will die Arbeit dem sich verändernden Zeitgeist, aber auch den neuen Produktionsstrukturen Hollywoods, nachgehen. Thematisiert wird das Festhalten des Regisseurs Ford an seinen persönlichen künstlerischen Prinzipien und gesellschaftlichen Idealen, sowie der daraus entstehende Bruch zwischen Künstler und Publikum. Die Arbeit versteht sich thematisch als eine Verbindung zwischen Filmwissenschaft, Filmgeschichte, US-amerikanischer Geschichte sowie US-amerikanischer Ideen- und Sozialgeschichte