In terms of the concept of a working causal station, Hitchcock talks of genuine or token causation in the following the terms:
(10) If c and e are distinct actual events and X and Z are binary variables whose values represent the occurrence and non-occurrence of these events, then c is a cause of e if and only if there is an active causal route from X to Z in an appropriate causal model
Lewis hotel to quasi-dependence given that shattering of the container (e) will not counterfactually confidence Suzys throw (c), owing to what would has actually taken place got she maybe not tossed (viz, Billys stone might have shattered this new bottle alternatively)
As mentioned, (10) does not deal with cases of symmetric overdetermination given that whenever Suzy and Billy each other place the stones individually, for each and every put is enough into container to split, and you will each other stones hit the container thus neither toss preempts this new most other, given that neither put is found on a working route as the outlined in the (9). To deal with such as for example cases, Hitchcock weakens (10) because of the replacement the new ‘active channel for the (10) into the notion of a beneficial weakly productive station (2001: 290). The most idea here there is good weakly energetic station anywhere between X and you can Z only whenever Z counterfactually utilizes X in freezing of some you are able to, never actual, beliefs of your own parameters which are not with the station regarding X so you’re able to Z. Intuitively, to recuperate counterfactual reliance anywhere between Suzys place plus the shattering i keep fixed BT = 0: got Suzy not tossed on model in which Billy does not toss, this new package don’t have smashed. Also for Billys put.
The basic means implemented here to manage each other preemption and you can shaped overdetermination holds a glaring resemblance to help you Lewiss quasi-reliance option to the newest late preemption situation. e quasi-hinges on c, yet not, because of the fact you to inside a possible globe towards the exact same laws and regulations where the intrinsic profile of procedure regarding c to help you elizabeth is the same but Billy does not place, there is the needed counterfactual reliance. ‘Cold parameters which are not intrinsic towards c-elizabeth procedure within their genuine opinions (for the late preemption cases) elizabeth.g. freezing BH in the 0 converts roughly an equivalent secret. The newest key huge difference would be the fact Lewiss solution involves appealing to the newest insights out-of a completely ordinary counterfactual (“If Suzy hadn’t thrown, …”) on a possible business in which some real incidents (elizabeth.g. Billys hit) cannot are present, given that architectural-equations services relates to appealing to your situation out couples seeking single men of an effective counterfactual with a different version of antecedent (“Got Suzy not tossed and you can Billys material nevertheless maybe not struck, …”). Hitchcock phone calls these ‘explicitly nonforetracking (ENF) counterfactuals. (Similarly getting symmetrical overdetermination, where i ‘freeze BT at the 0 this time a low-actual worthy of to recoup counterfactual reliance between Suzys toss and also the shattering.)
5.2 SEF and you may Counterfactuals
Those who have pursued the newest SEF method to delivering a diagnosis off ‘actual causation that’s, the fresh causal loved ones between real, form of incidents experienced little to express concerning semantics of the counterfactuals one to underpin SEF. Some article writers (e.g. Hitchcock 2001) explicitly and lots of authors implicitly assume a generally Lewisian method of counterfactuals, and so the architectural equations is representations out-of affairs from facts from the counterfactual reliance because discussed more than whoever realities criteria is actually generally Lewisian.