揭示七种因果定义实则同源，三类区分无实质差异
Difference-Making without Making a Difference
- 指出最新因果定义同时包含三类理论框架
- 在关键案例中证明七种定义均存在逻辑漏洞
- 适合哲学与因果推断研究者深入探讨
安德烈亚斯与冈特连续发表七篇论文，提出七种实际因果定义，并将其归为三类竞争性理论：事实差异性、反事实差异性与规律依赖型。本文表明，其最新提出的事实差异性定义实际上同时涵盖全部三类特征，从而证明这三类区分并无实质差异。进一步通过多个关键案例对比该新理论与其他六种理论，揭示七种定义均存在根本性缺陷，动摇了原有分类体系的可靠性。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Over a series of seven papers, Andreas & Günther have introduced seven definitions of actual causation and have classified them as belonging to three different, competing, types of accounts: factual difference-making, counterfactual difference-making, and regularity-based. I show that their most recent - factual difference-making - definition instantiates all three types, thereby proving that these are distinctions without a difference. I further compare their novel account to the other six accounts on several crucial examples, revealing that this undermines all seven of their accounts.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。