Re: Science and Causality

[Kevin de Laplante <***>]

Howard writes: "Saying causes are real is your assertion. It is not an
argument. I agree with most modern philosophers and scientists (see, e.g.
"Causation" in the Encyclopedia of Philosophy) that the concept of cause is
an anthropomorphic concept that is gratuitous for scientific models. I am
not as extreme as Bertrand Russell who regarded the concept of cause as "a
relic of a bygone age." I think the concept of causality is useful, but not
because it corresponds to anything that a physicist would call real. It is a
metaphor for what humans feel when they think they have control. Hume
explains why the concept of control is only a metaphor."

I just thought I'd qualify Howard's statement about the status of the
concept of "cause" in contemporary science and philosophy.  Hume certainly
was the impetus for the skeptical turn that manifested itself most strongly
in the writings of the logical positivists (and it's worth noting that the
positivists revered Newton but denied that Newton's laws should be
interpreted in anything like causal terms).  With the demise of positivism
there has been a gradual return to metaphysics among philosophers of
science, though the field is still split between empiricists of a Humean
bent and realists who are not afraid to venture into metaphysics.  Suffice
it to say that the metaphysics of causality and the role of the concept of
cause in science remains an open problem among philosophers.  Among working
scientists it's difficult to say whether there's any consensus view on the
subject, though I doubt there is.

To see some of the variety of approaches to causation in the philosophical
literature, you might check out the list of entries in the Stanford Online
Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.hmtl#c


For an interesting paper that argues for skepticism about "causal
fundamentalism" in science on non-Humean grounds, you might be interested in
the following by John Norton:

www.philosophersimprint.org/003004/

I'm not necessarily endorsing any of this, just emphasizing that there
really is a diversity of opinion on the subject.

regards,

Kevin