Gunnar,
Appropriate in the context of living with relativity theory for 100
years. I do not intend to say that relativity theory has done away with
causality, though. Just that our most advanced understanding of nature
is based on acknowledging the importance of observer relativity.
And yes, I am saying that causation changes depending on interpretation
and intent. How? By selecting those potential causes that fit into the
current context. The trick lies in "other things being equal": If
"nothing else changes", and I press my knife into the apple, then the
apple gets cut, so I (and my knife) caused the cut. But "other things"
are never really "equal": One could imagine a frozen apple (would not
cut so easily), an apple made of different material (now the softness of
apple cells caused the cut), a different makeup for human muscle (now
human muscle cell dynamics caused the cut), or spontaneous quantum leaps
(maybe the knife had nothing to do with the cut after all, those atoms
just suddenly did not stick together any more). What someone calls a
"cause" is never both a necessary (effect could not have been generated
otherwise) and sufficient (effect will always follow) condition for
"effects". We select those potential "causes" that appear relevant to
our goals. Like with beauty, the perception of causality is not entirely
random (who would doubt the beauty of a tropical sunset or that lack of
food causes death?), but like with beauty, recognition of some causes
will always be controversial (was the world trade center beautiful? does
poverty cause crime?). Causality is not a thing, it is a conceptual tool
for building models. As such, it is as much subjected to individual whim
as other conceptual tools.
Oliver
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, 7 January 2005 11:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: cutting apple - cause or effect?
On Jan 6, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Hoffmann, Oliver - HOFOY001 wrote:
> Wouldn't it be appropriate to adopt some of the underlying
> views and say: "Causality, like beauty, lies in the eye of the
> beholder"?
Oliver,
I don't understand. Appropriate to what?
Are you saying that causation changes depending on position,
interpretation, individual whim, or what?
Gunnar
|