[hist-analytic] Davidson's Hume
Roger Bishop Jones
rbj at rbjones.com
Sat May 23 17:20:09 EDT 2009
On Saturday 23 May 2009 17:12:00 steve bayne wrote:
>"For if events were causes, then a true description of some event would be
> 'the cause of b', and, given that such an event exists, it follows
> logically that the cause of b caused b." (Davidson in Action and Events p.
>But does the fact that this means that it is logically necessary that the
> cause of b caused b is not so obvious. Let's take a look.
The bit you quote from Davidson, after the correction offered
by Aune seems OK,
Its not clear from your message what Davidson concluded from this,
e.g. did he make the inference you question above?
More information about the hist-analytic