Conditional vs Casual

913979

Hi, I am having a hard time differentiating between a cause and effect and a conditional statement. Would anyone have tips or tricks?

apublicdisplay

This is a broad question, but I think of it in terms that a conditional statement relies on validity and deductive reasoning (think mathematics) while a causal relationship often relies on empirical and inductive (think science and the phenomenon-hypothesis method of reasoning).

What I mean by that is that for conditional reasoning, it doesn't matter what the subject matter is so much as what the logical structure of the statement is. The statement "If I eat, then pigs will fly; I eat, therefore pigs will fly" is valid regardless of what the subject matter is. Even though in reality we know this statement about eating and pigs flying is nonsensical, we know it's valid entirely because it's based on the "If...then..." statement structure and through deductive reasoning. Again, think about mathematics. "Timmy adds 3 and 2 bananas, therefore he has 5 bananas in total." The subject matter is not a relevant consideration so much as the function of addition, just like in the previous example, the function of the "if...then" statement is the relevant part. Because it's so mathematically precise, this might explain why Must Be True, Most Strongly Supported, Sufficient Assumption questions, etc., make a lot of use of conditional reasoning.

In causal reasoning, we rely more on inductive reasoning, which involves inferring general laws (hypothesis) from particular instances (phenomenon). Clearly, going from particular to general is not 100% logically accurate but for inductive reasoning, the standard is a lot lower than what it takes to be deductively true. Again, think science. How would a scientist prove that the consumption of food causes pigs to fly? Through observation. One thing that would have to be done would be to provide repeated instances of the cause (eating) preceding the effect (pigs flying). Of course, this opens the door to all kinds of potential Strengthen and Weaken questions.

jknauf

Causal reasoning has an implied temporal relationship. An effect must come after a cause. 'The rain caused the flood'

Conditional is more like a rule that says if we have this, then we have this.

'If it is raining, then we will not go to gym'

The difference between the two is we know if we have a sufficient condition, the necessary must follow.

If we have causal, the cause doesn't guarantee that affect. If it rains, does that mean it always floods? Nope!

Best of luck

ccys94

conditional + cause = causal

this is how I've stored those concepts in my mind.

nessa.k13.0

Another way to think about the difference between conditionality and causality is that conditional reasoning has an "if...then" structure where one condition (circumstance, event, variable, factor etc) necessitates another (OR you could say one condition (etc) is sufficient for another to occur----like a lot of logic game rules). With causality, it's less of a universal rule like @jknauf said and more temporal.
Causal statement: Jknauf commented so I saw a picture of an eagle (cause, JKnauf commented and effect, I saw a picture of an eagle).

Conditional statement: If Jkauf comments then I'll see a picture of an eagle (sufficient condition -Jknauf comments, necessary condition-I'll see a picture of an eagle).

Those two statements^ kinda mean the same thing in English, but the former has a causal (cause/effect or one thing yielded way to another) reasoning structure while the latter has a conditional (if/then sufficiency/necessity---implying something could occur again under certain circumstances) reasoning structure.

Q.E.D

Conditionals are more presentable in formal logic, but you can keep it casual in an appropriate setting.

https://media.giphy.com/media/lfoC8HjUQlQT6/giphy.gif