This website is an introduction to casual arguments. The website states that arguing causation if extremely important for inductive reasoning. Lawyers use casual arguments all the time because they are always trying to prove what caused something and how that caused something else which proves their point. There must also be a commonality in the argument for it to be inductive. The website goes on explaining the three factors that the strength of casual arguments rely on.
1). How acceptable the unspoken judgment is.
2). How likely the causation is
3). How trustworthy the "only significant difference" is
The website also states that a strong correlation is not enough to prove causation.
I found this website useful and the example of the driver and the bicyclist useful but a bit confusing at times. The exercises were very helpful though because they explained why I was correct or incorrect, which helped me understand the concept better.
I agree that the cause and effect website is an introduction that explains casual arguments. Lawyers definitely use casual arguments consistently and frequently in the court room to prove a point and to argue cases for their clients. The example used by the web site seems to have proven this point right on the dot. The three factors that are listed also help these people conduct their arguments in the courtroom by giving them a system on how to evaluate the strength of their casual arguments. It is also seen in many real world experiences how a strong correlation is not enough to prove causation when a lawyer fails to defend his or her client.
ReplyDelete