Interventionist counterfactuals

Rachael Briggs*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    112 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    A number of recent authors (Galles and Pearl, Found Sci 3 (1):151-182, 1998; Hiddleston, Noûs 39 (4):232-257, 2005; Halpern, J Artif Intell Res 12:317-337, 2000) advocate a causal modeling semantics for counterfactuals. But the precise logical significance of the causal modeling semantics remains murky. Particularly important, yet particularly under-explored, is its relationship to the similarity-based semantics for counterfactuals developed by Lewis (Counterfactuals. Harvard University Press, 1973b). The causal modeling semantics is both an account of the truth conditions of counterfactuals, and an account of which inferences involving counterfactuals are valid. As an account of truth conditions, it is incomplete. While Lewis's similarity semantics lets us evaluate counterfactuals with arbitrarily complex antecedents and consequents, the causal modeling semantics makes it hard to ascertain the truth conditions of all but a highly restricted class of counterfactuals. I explain how to extend the causal modeling language to encompass a wider range of sentences, and provide a sound and complete axiomatization for the extended language. Extending the truth conditions for counterfactuals has serious consequences concerning valid inference. The extended language is unlike any logic of Lewis's: modus ponens is invalid, and classical logical equivalents cannot be freely substituted in the antecedents of conditionals.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)139-166
    Number of pages28
    JournalPhilosophical Studies
    Volume160
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Aug 2012

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Interventionist counterfactuals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this