자유게시판

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Energy and resources can be had in limitless quantities forever, though the input price may vary. Even though Humeans deny that modal properties, including causal properties, are part of the world’s fundamental ontology, they may allow for the existence of non-fundamental causal facts that are reducible to fundamental physical properties. Non-Humeans, by contrast, take fundamental properties to include modal properties, such as nomic necessitation relations, dispositional essences, or causal properties. For non-Humeans causal features can be among the fundamental building blocks of the world. Humean accounts deny the existence of fundamental modalities and maintain that fundamentally the universe is composed of a distribution of categorical properties and relations instantiated by localized entities-what David Lewis called the "Humean mosaic" (Lewis 1973; Loewer 2012). On the Humean view, all true modal claims, including causal claims, are grounded in non-modal features of the mosaic. In taking existing concepts of causation as its starting point the functional project concerning causation engages primarily in what David Chalmers calls "re-engineering" rather than "de novo engineering" (Chalmers 2018, see Other Internet Resources). Regularity accounts, Mackie’s INUS condition account, or David Lewis’s counterfactual analysis are all examples of the descriptive project. Alternatively, a descriptive project may take physicists’ own widespread use of causal notions, both in research articles and in physics textbooks, as its starting point and proposes an analysis of the underlying causal concepts.

In neoclassical economics if it takes time to move from one equilibrium to another, this would mean that markets may not clear, trading could take place at "false prices" and they might never settle down again. Now in real markets there is no auctioneer; buying and selling is continuous, prices actually emerge from the dynamic interaction of different agents who don’t have perfect knowledge and often use rules of thumb or customs to guide their decisions. It also tend to ignore most important aspects of scale, energy use, resource limits, how aggregate markets are not scaled up individual demand and supply curves, and how economic actors actually interact, adapt, behave and choose. Yet while charged particles are associated with world lines, the electromagnetic field, with which charged particles interacts, cannot be associated with a world line along which energy is conserved. Some of them (like Bosco) even are able to turn while traversing the space! Coupled with the later introduction of "rational expectations" - in which actors have perfect foresight and complete information - this enabled economics to ignore space and time. But there are many other sorts of economics in which human and planetary justice matter.

It is very unlikely indeed a priori that there should be a Universe made of matter behaving in totally regular ways, giving rise to conscious beings capable of changing themselves and others, What are billiard balls made of making themselves fit for the Heaven of which they have a glimpse in religious experience. He wants there to be creatures who can share in His creative work by making choices which affect the world they live in and the other creatures who live in that world. Within the metaphysical project, granting that an asymmetry in initial conditions can justify an appeal to causal judgments is compatible with two distinct types of view on the metaphysics of causation. The main division in the metaphysics of causation is between broadly Humean and non-Humean accounts of causation. It’s the same with time. It’s unjustified carbon chauvinism. The sad fact is, however, that these models have not only proved spectacularly unable to make predictions, and not just of periodic financial and banking crises, but much more importantly they haven’t even been able to explain such events after the fact. Indeed, philosophical discussions examining the fit of causal notions with physics can benefit from distinguishing carefully-and perhaps more carefully than it is often done-among the different projects within which the discussions take place.

Yet the question concerning the fit with physics is best thought of as a question to be addressed within each of the three projects. For any metaphysical account compatible with physics the question arises, what the truth-makers of causal claims are or what grounds these claims. A conceptual analysis offers necessary and sufficient conditions for claims of the form "c causes e". There are two reasons why the Paley Commission's
predictions were topsy-turvy: First, the commission
reasoned from the notion of finiteness and used a static
technical analysis of the sort discussed in Chapter 2.

A hundred years ago resources seemed limitless and
the struggle upward from meager conditions of life
was the struggle to create the means and methods of
getting these materials into use. The functional project has close affinities to what in recent years has been discussed under the term conceptual engineering (Cappelen 2018). Conceptual engineering aims to develop precise philosophical concepts that fulfil certain cognitive goals, often taking an existing concept as its starting point, offering a philosophical precissification of this concept and then engaging in an assessment of the precissified concept’s usefulness. In contrast with the metaphysical project, the descriptive project aims to describe our causal reasoning practices.