Seeing causing

Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 103 (3):257-280 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Singularists about causation often claim that we can have experiences as of causation. This paper argues that regularity theorists need not deny that claim; hence the possibility of causal experience is no objection to regularity theories of causation. The fact that, according to a regularity theorist, causal experience requires background theory does not provide grounds for denying that it is genuine experience. The regularity theorist need not even deny that non-inferential perceptual knowledge of causation is possible, despite the fact that such knowledge would sometimes allow us to make inferences about what happens in far-off places and times

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
77 (#221,179)

6 months
477 (#3,334)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Helen Beebee
University of Leeds

Citations of this work

The contents of perception.Susanna Siegel - 2005 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Causation and Observation.Helen Beebee - 2009 - In Helen Beebee, Christopher Hitchcock & Peter Menzies (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Causation. Oxford University Press.
Knowing why.Ryan Cox - 2018 - Mind and Language 33 (2):177-197.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Discrimination and perceptual knowledge.Alvin I. Goldman - 1976 - Journal of Philosophy 73 (November):771-791.
A World of States of Affairs.D. M. Armstrong - 1993 - Philosophical Perspectives 7:429-440.
Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge.Alvin I. Goldman - 2000 - In Sven Bernecker & Fred I. Dretske (eds.), Knowledge: readings in contemporary epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 86-102.
Observation reconsidered.Jerry Fodor - 1984 - Philosophy of Science 51 (March):23-43.

View all 32 references / Add more references