Confidence and Causality Niels van Miltenburg [email protected].

Confidence and Causality

Niels van Miltenburg

[email protected]

Presentation Outline


Introduce von Wright’s ideas with the help of an example of an experiment



Distinguish between von Wright’s “strong” and “weak” positions



Distinguish between von Wright’s “strong” and “weak” positions

Argue that the “weak” position is the most interesting position

Magnifying Glass Example


Does the intervention need to be a human action?



Von Wright: “Yes”




What makes action so special?




What makes action so special? Von Wright: There is a conceptual connection

between the concepts of causation and action

Counterfactual Element in Action

Counterfactual Element in Action Certain changes in nature would not have

occurred had we not produced them

Counterfactual Element in Action Certain changes in nature would not have

occurred had we not produced them

We can only act because we are confident that the world remains fairly stable

Strong vs Weak

Strong vs Weak

Strong: ‘p causes q’ means that we could produce q by bringing about p

Strong vs Weak

Strong: ‘p causes q’ means that we could produce q by bringing about p

Weak: We distinguish between causal relations and accidental regularities by using the notion of action, which is conceptually connected with the notion of causation

“Causalaria”

“Causalaria”

A

B

Hume

Given the fact that we can only observe regularly succeeding events, why do we see them as causally linked?

Confidence and Knowledge


Confidence is intrinsic to our actions and constitutes our ability to act


Confidence is intrinsic to our actions and constitutes our ability to act

Analogy with Anscombe’s ‘knowledge without observation’

Thanks for Listening

Confidence and Causality Niels van Miltenburg [email protected].

Documents

Transcript of Confidence and Causality Niels van Miltenburg [email protected].