In terms of the notion of an active causal station, Hitchcock describes actual or token causation on the adopting the terminology:
(10) If c and e are distinct actual events and X and Z are binary variables whose values represent the occurrence and non-occurrence of these events, then c is a cause of e if and only if there is an active causal route from X to Z in an appropriate causal model
Lewis lodge to help you quasi-reliance as shattering of your container (e) cannot counterfactually trust Suzys toss (c), compliment of what can has actually happened got she perhaps not tossed (viz, Billys hookup bars Modesto rock will have shattered the fresh new container instead)
As mentioned, (10) does not deal with instances of shaped overdetermination as the when Suzy and you may Billy one another throw the rocks independently, for each and every throw will do towards the bottle to break, and each other rocks strike the bottle so neither toss preempts the newest almost every other, while the neither put is on an energetic route as defined from inside the (9). To manage such as for instance circumstances, Hitchcock weakens (10) of the substitution the brand new ‘active station for the (10) on the idea of good weakly effective channel (2001: 290). Probably the most suggestion right here that there is a good weakly productive channel ranging from X and you may Z only whenever Z counterfactually relies on X in freezing of a few you can easily, never real, thinking of your details which are not on route out-of X in order to Z. Naturally, to recover counterfactual dependency anywhere between Suzys throw as well as the shattering i keep fixed BT = 0: had Suzy perhaps not thrown on design in which Billy doesnt throw, the brand new bottle don’t have smashed. Furthermore having Billys put.
Might approach implemented here to cope with both preemption and you may symmetrical overdetermination contains an obvious resemblance so you can Lewiss quasi-dependence substitute for the fresh new later preemption situation. e quasi-depends on c, although not, because one into the a possible business into the exact same laws and regulations where in actuality the inherent profile of one’s processes out-of c so you can e is similar but Billy does not place, you’ve got the needed counterfactual dependence. ‘Cold variables which are not intrinsic into the c-age procedure on their real thinking (from inside the late preemption times) elizabeth.g. freezing BH at the 0 transforms around a similar key. New core differences is that Lewiss services concerns appealing to the latest knowledge of a perfectly typical counterfactual (“If the Suzy had not tossed, …”) during the a potential community where particular real incidents (e.g. Billys hit) you should never exist, because architectural-equations provider concerns popular with happening off an effective counterfactual which have a unique sorts of antecedent (“Had Suzy maybe not tossed and you can Billys rock still perhaps not strike, …”). Hitchcock calls these ‘explicitly nonforetracking (ENF) counterfactuals. (Also getting shaped overdetermination, in which we ‘frost BT within 0 this time around a non-actual well worth to recover counterfactual dependence anywhere between Suzys place together with shattering.)
5.2 SEF and you will Counterfactuals
Anyone who has pursued the SEF method to getting a diagnosis off ‘genuine causation that’s, the fresh causal relation between actual, sort of situations have experienced little or no to state regarding semantics of counterfactuals you to definitely underpin SEF. Some writers (elizabeth.g. Hitchcock 2001) explicitly and lots of experts implicitly guess a broadly Lewisian way of counterfactuals, so the structural equations was representations out of relations of products regarding counterfactual dependency because demonstrated above whose knowledge standards is broadly Lewisian.