Empiricism Must, but Cannot, Presuppose Real Causation

6Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In this article, I put forward a basic philosophical claim: empirical scientific knowledge, that is, knowledge generated in experimental and observational practices, presupposes real causation. My discussion exploits two core notions from the philosophical analysis of scientific experimentation and observation: the aim of realizing object-apparatus correlations and the required control of the relevant interactions between environment and experimental or observational system. The conclusion is that, without the notion of real causation, acquiring epistemically sound empirical knowledge is impossible. Several empiricist objections to this conclusion are discussed and refuted. As a consequence, empiricism faces an unsolvable dilemma: either it cannot account for empirical knowledge or it should accept the existence of unobservable but real causal interactions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Radder, H. (2021). Empiricism Must, but Cannot, Presuppose Real Causation. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 52(4), 597–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-021-09551-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free