Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Philosophical Studies Series ((PSSP,volume 93))

  • 150 Accesses

Abstract

With the above analysis of the causal relation in hand (i.e., causation as a circumstantial counterfactual dependence with a specific physical infrastructure as its circumstantially necessary condition) we have reached a point where we can address the first of the five problems of mental causation, described in the Introduction: the problem of mental anomalism. The problem was that while our beliefs and desires are causes of our actions, they do not seem to be such in virtue of nomically necessitating them (or nomically raising their probability). But given that cause and law are inseparable, how can this be?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. For an account along these lines see also Armstrong 1997, Ch. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  2. The actual background of this denial is, of course, Hume’s psychologistic claim that causality is a matter of association of ideas, motivated by regularities in our sense impressions, rather than matters of fact in the world of objects. But Hume was right, in my view, in claiming that the idea of a relation’s being causal could not get into one’s mind via the senses.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A more sceptical version of this view would be the claim that the notion of causality is a naive projection of our own will, action and sensitivity on other items in the world.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See, for instance, Plotkin (1997, 186–200), who refers to experimental work of Baillargeon, Leslie, and Spelke.

    Google Scholar 

  5. E.g., Plotkin 1994 and Buskes 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. We will see that this normative notion is appropriate: our senses are not there to create illusions, but to make us aware of what is really the case. But biological economy does not care for infallibility.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

De Muijnck, W. (2003). Causation and Natural Law. In: Dependencies, Connections, and Other Relations. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 93. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0121-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0121-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6326-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0121-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics