Are causal facts really explanatorily emergent? Ladyman and Ross on higher-level causal facts and renormalization group explanation

نویسنده

  • Alexander Reutlinger
چکیده

In their Every Thing Must Go, Ladyman and Ross defend a novel version of NeoRussellian metaphysics of causation, which falls into three claims: (1) there are no fundamental physical causal facts (orthodox Russellian claim), (2) there are higher-level causal facts of the special sciences, and (3) higher-level causal facts are explanatorily emergent. While accepting claims (1) and (2), I attack claim (3). Ladyman and Ross argue that higher-level causal facts are explanatorily emergent, because (a) certain aspects of these higher-level facts (their universality) can be captured by renormalization group (RG) explanations, and (b) RG explanations are not reductive explanations. However, I argue that RG explanation should be understood as reductive explanations. This result undermines Ladyman and Ross’s RG-based argument for the explanatory emergence of higher-level causal facts. 1 Alexander Reutlinger, Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, LudwigMaximilians-Universität Munich, Ludwigstr. 31, 80539 Munich, Germany. Email: [email protected]

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Causal inference and causal explanation with background knowledge

This paper presents correct algorithms for answering the following two questions; (i) Does there exist a causal explanation con­ sistent with a set of background knowledge which explains all of the observed indepen­ dence facts in a sample? (ii) Given that there is such a causal explanation what are the causal relationships common to every such

متن کامل

Arguments Using Ontological and Causal Knowledge

We explore an approach to reasoning about causes via argumentation. We consider a causal model for a physical system, and we look for arguments about facts. Some arguments are meant to provide explanations of facts whereas some challenge these explanations and so on. At the root of argumentation here, are causal links ({A1, · · · , An} causes B) and also ontological links (c1 is a c2). We intro...

متن کامل

Philosophy of causation : blind alleys exposed ; promising directions highlighted

Contemporary philosophical work on causation is a tangled mess of disparate aims, approaches, and accounts. Best to cut through it by means of ruthless but, hopefully, sensible judgments. The ones that follow are designed to sketch the most fruitful avenues for future work. Contemporary philosophical work on causation is a tangled mess of disparate aims, approaches, and accounts. Best to cut th...

متن کامل

The Causal and Unification Approaches to Explanation Unified—Causally

Two major modern accounts of explanation are the causal and the unification accounts. My aim in this paper is to provide a kind of unification of the two, by using the central technical apparatus of the unification account to solve a central problem faced by the causal account, namely, the problem of determining which parts of a causal network are explanatorily relevant to the occurrence of an ...

متن کامل

Why Is There Universal Macro-Behavior? Renormalization Group Explanation As Non-causal Explanation

Renormalization group (RG) methods are an established strategy to explain how it is possible that microscopically different systems exhibit virtually the same macro behavior when undergoing phase-transitions. I argue – in agreement with Robert Batterman – that RG explanations are non-causal explanations. However, Batterman misidentifies the reason why RG explanations are non-causal: it is not t...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Synthese

دوره 194  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2017