Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorTouborg, Caroline Torpe
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-26T15:30:11Z
dc.date.available2017-05-26T15:30:11Z
dc.date.issued2018-07
dc.identifier250006942
dc.identifier33896b49-cf75-4a41-9272-8f0cf442ca97
dc.identifier85019770213
dc.identifier000434161600001
dc.identifier.citationTouborg , C T 2018 , ' Hasteners and delayers : why rains don't cause fires ' , Philosophical Studies , vol. 175 , no. 7 , pp. 1557-1576 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-017-0923-4en
dc.identifier.issn0031-8116
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/10865
dc.description.abstractWe typically judge that hasteners are causes of what they hasten, while delayers are not causes of what they delay. These judgements, I suggest, are sensitive to an underlying metaphysical distinction. To see this, we need to pay attention to a relation that I call positive security-dependence, where an event E security-depends positively on an earlier event C just in case E could more easily have failed to occur if C had not occurred. I suggest that we judge that an event C is a cause of a later event E only if E security-depends positively on C. This explains our causal judgements in typical cases of hastening and delaying as well as in atypical cases, where we judge that hasteners are not causes of what they hasten or that delayers are causes of what they delay.
dc.format.extent479620
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPhilosophical Studiesen
dc.subjectCausationen
dc.subjectHasteningen
dc.subjectDelayingen
dc.subjectBC Logicen
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subject.lccBCen
dc.titleHasteners and delayers : why rains don't cause firesen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-017-0923-4
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record