Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T04:04:22.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stretched Lines, Averted Leaps, And Excluded Competition: A Theory of Scientific Counterfactuals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Gregory M. Mikkelson
Gregory M. Mikkelson*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Lewis' argument against the Limit Assumption and Pollock's Generalized Consequence Principle together suggest that “minimal-change” theories of counterfactuals are wrong. The “small-change” theories presented by Nute do not say enough. While these theories rely on closeness between possible worlds, I base an alternative on the ceteris paribus concept. My theory solves a problem that the above cannot, and is more relevant to the philosophy of science. Ceteris paribus conditions should normally include the causes, but exclude the effects, of the negated antecedent. An example from community ecology, the debate over null models in island-biogeographical studies of competition, supports these arguments.

Type
Causation and Explanation
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 63 , Issue S3: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers Sep., 1996. , 1996 , pp. S194 - S201
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I thank Bill Wimsatt, Dave Walton, Scott Anderson, Marshall Abrams, Philip Robbins, Gunter Eble, Leigh Van Valen and Mathew Leibold for comments about this article.

‡

Committee on Conceptual Foundations of Science, University of Chicago, 5801 S. Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637.

References

Bennett, J. (1974), “Counterfactuals and Possible Worlds”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 4:381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callebaut, W. (1993), Taking the Naturalistic Turn or How Real Philosophy of Science is Done. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Colwell, R. K. and Winkler, D. W. (1984), “A Null Model for Null Models in Biogeography”, in Strong, D. R., Simberloff, D., Abele, L. G. and Thistle, A. B. (eds.), Ecological Communities: Conceptual Issues and the Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 344–359.10.1515/9781400857081.344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, G. (1993), “The Competition Controversy in Ecology”, Biology and Philosophy 8:359–384.10.1007/BF00857684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, J. M. (1975), “Assembly of Species Communities”, in Cody, M. L. and Diamond, J. M. (eds.), Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 342–444.Google Scholar
Elton, C. (1946), “Competition and the Structure of Ecological Communities”, Journal of Animal Ecology 15:54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, J. D. (1991), “Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science”, World Politics 43:169–195.10.2307/2010470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N. (1947), “The Problem of Counterfactual Conditionals”, The Journal of Philosophy 44:113–128.10.2307/2019988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwich, P. (1987), Asymmetries in Time: Problems in the Philosophy of Science. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. (1977), “A Causal Theory of Counterfactuals”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 55:3–21.10.1080/00048407712341001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsland, S. E. (1985), Modeling Nature: Episodes in the History of Population Ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1973), Counterfactuals. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nute, D. (1984), “Conditional Logic”, in Gabbay, D. and Guenthner, R. (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Volume II: Extensions of Classical Logic. Boston: D. Reidel, pp. 387–440.10.1007/978-94-009-6259-0_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, J. L. (1976), Subjunctive Reasoning. Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sloep, P. B. (1993), “Methodology Revitalized?”, British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 44:231–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E. and Tooley, M. (1993), “Introduction”, in Sosa, E. and Tooley, M. (eds.), Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R. (1968), “A theory of conditionals”, Studies in Logical Theory, American Philosophical Quarterly, Monograph 2:98–112.Google Scholar
Strong, D R. Jr., Simberloff, D., Abele, L. G., and Thistle, A. B. (1984), “Preface”, in Strong, D. R. Jr., Simberloff, D., Abele, L. G., and Thistle, A. B. (eds.), Ecological Communities: Conceptual Issues and the Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. vii–x.10.1515/9781400857081.viiCrossRefGoogle Scholar