Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles
(1988) Synthese 76 (3).
I defend my attempt to explain causal priority by means of one-way causal conditionship by answering an argument by J. A. Cover about Charles' law. Then I attempt to say what makes a philosophical analysis a counterfactual analysis, so I can understand Cover's claim that my account is “at its base a counterfactual one”. Finally I examine Cover's discussion of my contention that “necessary for in the circumstances” is nontransitive.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/BF00869608
Full citation:
Sanford, D. H. (1988). Can there be one-way causal conditionship?. Synthese 76 (3), pp. 397-408.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.