The AskPhilosophers logo.

Time

Generally we suppose that if there is any time lapse between event A and a subsequent event B, A cannot be the cause of B. But what if time were continuous, such that between any times t1 and t2, we might specify a distinct time t3? In that case, there would always be some time lapse between any two events: would that make causation as described impossible? Does conceiving of time as quantized solve the problem?
Accepted:
April 14, 2011

Comments

Peter Smith
April 14, 2011 (changed April 14, 2011) Permalink

But we don't "generally" suppose that earlier events can't cause later events! Jack's earlier smoking caused his cancer, the earthquake ten minutes ago caused the tsunami now rolling across the ocean, my flick of the switch caused the light to come on a fraction of a second later, and so it goes. If anything, the "general" view is that causes precede their effects. It is not for nothing that, for example, David Hume's first attempt at a definition of a cause is as "an object, followed by another, and where all objects similar to the first are followed by objects similar to the second".

  • Log in to post comments

Donald Baxter
April 21, 2011 (changed April 21, 2011) Permalink

Alternatively, Bertrand Russell uses the problem you raise to critique the Humean account of causation and propose a successor. See Russell's discussion of laws of change in his book The Analysis of Mind.

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/3991
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org