Suchergebnisse

AbstractDavid Hume and other philosophers doubt that causality can be perceived directly. Instead, observers become aware of it through inference based on the perception of the two events constituting cause and effect of the causal relation. However, Hume and the other philosophers primarily consider causal relations in which one object triggers a motion or change in another. In this paper, I will argue against Hume's assumption by distinguishing a kind of causal relations in which an agent is controlling the motion or change of an object. I will call this kind of causal relations 'causation-as-control'. In instances of causation-as-control, the observer does not become aware of the causality through inference based on the perception of two events (cause and effect). Rather, she perceives the two events directly and without further inference as cause and effect of a causal relation, and, therefore, the causality at work.

This book offers a critique of the present status of the concept of causality in the social sciences. "The Causality Syndrome" consists of a belief in causal studies as more important than other studies, a narrow definition of causality, and rules of thumb regarding how to make causal claims. The book argues that the present dominance of this syndrome has considerable downsides and presents a challenge to social science. The book dissects the many interconnected ideas which undergird this syndrome and offers an intellectual home for advanced students, researchers and others who are concerned about the present dominance of The Causality Syndrome. The book critically discusses whether "causality" deserves the central position in social science that its advocates desire. The text shows how methodological rules about causal inference are used to protect causal studies from critique, even in situations where these rules are not followed. It is argued that institutionalization of these rules as symbols of good and trustworthy social science is highly problematic and comes with a price. One of the casualties of causality is that there is less motivation to study complex and pressing issues in society which do not lend themselves to causal study designs. The sections are short. The argument unfolds in a lively, engaged form with examples from many fields, including public health, evaluation and organizational studies. The case examples include classical experiments as well as contemporary research, e.g. studies of the effectiveness of restrictions targeting the spread of coronavirus. Peter Dahler-Larsen is Professor at the Department for Political Science at University of Copenhagen, Denmark, where he is the leader of the Centre for Research on Evaluation, Measurement and Effects (CREME).

International audience ; This article analyses specific acts of handwriting on paper in relation to digitization. It frames the artifact of the digital image of the handwritten note as a post-digital object, which is defined by the inseparability of analogue and digital and also highlights a relation to the digital in which internal opposition is a part of it. The article discusses the media function of post-digital contingency through two particular cases of handwriting on paper that circulates online. Firstly, it analyses post-digital handwriting in the political sphere using the example of the social media posting and sharing of Donald Trump's signature after he took presidential office. Secondly, it elaborates post-digital handwriting as an aesthetic phenomenon by discussing the Instagram account of renowned Swiss curator Hans Ulrich Obrist who has posted nearly 4,500 handwritten notes to 320,000 followers over eight years. Finally, it places these discussions into the context of the philosophy of Martin Heidegger to arrive at a better understanding of how the ontological difference of post-digital handwriting is produced.

For Kant causality is an a priori category of the understanding, a necessary condition for the possibility of any experience. Later Wittgenstein's philosophy rejects transcendentalism. We can only speak of causes and effects if in some basic situations, or 'language games', we already treat some things as causes of what happens. Since the notion of cause becomes meaningful only within a language game, it is not unambiguous. Quantum causal language games presuppose the use of quantum theory. We treat the latter as Wittgenstein's grammar of a quantum form of life', or rule (norm), anchored in its applications — quantum phenomena as language games. Quantum correlations are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocality of quantum mechanics. This is a view of quantum phenomena from the perspective of classical physics. Our contextual point of view rejects the nonlocality of quantum theory in the sense of instantaneous causal influence at a distance. But it does not admit its locality in the sense of classical causality either. We introduce the notion of quantum causality which allows us to treat quantum correlations as local, but context-dependent. Their formal cause is an entangled wave function. Any particular quantum correlation, identifiable in a context of its observation as a result of the wave function reduction, post factum can be treated as a classical causal correlation. From the point of view of the proposed contextual quantum realism, epistemology is secondary, and ontology is sensitive to context. Quantum correlations exist (are real) before application of the theory, independently of their identification (description, measurement), but have no identity, which appears only as a result of application of the theory and their identification in the context. In other words, they are real, but not pre-determined, not autonomous.