[hist-analytic] Davidson's Hume

Bruce Aune aune at philos.umass.edu
Sat May 23 13:49:37 EDT 2009


I think Steve has misunderstood Davidson.  Davidson says, "Given that  
an event of causing b exists, it follows logically that the cause of b  
caused b."  This assertion does NOT imply that it is logically  
necessary that the cause of b caused b."  What is logically necessary  
according to Davidson's claim is the conditional, "If an event of  
causing b exists, then the cause of b caused b."  But Davidson does  
make an error here.  The relevant necessary conditional needs a  
stronger antecedent, "If there is one and only one cause of b."  This  
antecedent allows us to infer that the cause of b caused b.

Bruce




More information about the hist-analytic mailing list