Contrastive explanation and the many absences problem

Explaining events by reference to something which did not happen is common in our daily explanatory practice. The world, it seems, is full of the consequences of things which did not happen and things that were left undone. The wound became septic because it was left untreated. The building succumbed to dry rot because maintenance was neglected. The child suffered because she was not removed from an abusive home. The milk went off because Clover forgot to put it back in the fridge. Fred lost his finger in the machine because the safety catch was not deployed. In cases like these we accept the lack of treatment, the neglect of maintenance, the non-removal of the child, Clover’s omission to return the milk to the fridge, and the failure to engage the safety mechanism as explanatory for the outcomes under attention. So it clearly is the case that we do accept absences and omissions as explanatory.