Normative Theory and Descriptive Psychology in Understanding Causal Reasoning: The Role of Interventions and Invariance

Abstract

This paper, like its companion explores some ways in which, on the one hand, normative theorizing about causation and causal reasoning and, on the other, empirical psychological investigations into causal cognition can be mutually illuminating. The topics considered include the connection between causal claims and claims about the outcomes of interventions and the various ways that invariance claims figure in causal judgment.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Psychological studies of causal and counterfactual reasoning.James Woodward - 2008 - In Christoph Hoerl, Teresa McCormack & Sarah R. Beck (eds.), Understanding Counterfactuals, Understanding Causation. Oxford University Press. pp. 16.
Demoralizing causation.David Danks, David Rose & Edouard Machery - 2013 - Philosophical Studies (2):1-27.
Laws, Causes, and Invariance.James Woodward - 2013 - In Stephen Mumford & Matthew Tugby (eds.), Metaphysics and Science. Oxford University Press.
The normative force of reasoning.Ralph Wedgwood - 2006 - Noûs 40 (4):660–686.
The Central Dogma as a Thesis of Causal Specificity.Marcel Weber - 2006 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 28 (4):595-610.
Causation and Intelligibility.David H. Sanford - 1994 - Philosophy 69 (267):55 - 67.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-07

Downloads
41 (#369,691)

6 months
2 (#1,157,335)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

James Woodward
University of Pittsburgh

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references