more from David M. Armstrong

Single Idea 17689

[catalogued under 26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 2. Types of cause]

Full Idea

Lacks and absences could perhaps by thought of as effects, but we ought to be deeply reluctant to think of them as causes.

Gist of Idea

Absences might be effects, but surely not causes?


David M. Armstrong (What is a Law of Nature? [1983], 10.4)

Book Reference

Armstrong,D.M.: 'What is a Law of Nature?' [CUP 1985], p.147

A Reaction

Odd. So we allow that they exist (as effects), but then deny that they have any causal powers?