... in awhile you can treat causation as conditional logic, but for ... to trust our instincts and causation studies on the "softer" LR ... PF can use both either causation or conditional logic, it's ...
... any actual physiological support or causation given and B is right ... the historians offered some biological causation to the occurrence like you ...
... what the historians believe is causation. B is wrong because it ... historians themselves are not implying causation, they have an observation that ...
... to deduce any mechanism of causation whatsoever. I understand that ... that there must be a causation mechanism for the phenomenon. ... the "historians are not implying causation," or that "the historians ... the AUTHOR's claim of causation which lies outside of ...
Correlation doesn't prove causation :wink: . Like btsao650 said, employing new strategies takes time, and it was only one section. I wouldn't read into too much.
Correlation can never prove causation, so concluding causation on the basis of correlation is a logical flaw, but correlation can strengthen the case, sometimes a little bit, sometimes a lot.
try to learn the different form on Flaw questions types such as correlation vs causation, sufficient and necessary condition negation, source of argument and so forth.
I might be making a correlation/causation error, but I think my link to the pencil sampler a day ago might have caused them to go out of stock. Did anyone (besides for me) end up ordering one?