Discussion Question #26

For the last discussion question of the week, I'm focusing on the differences between particular and general causes and effect claims. First though, I'll focus on the normal conditions that are present when we observe a cause and effect claim.

When we hear a cause and effect claim, such as "Jim walking outside during the winter caused him to catch a cold", we have to treat it like a regular argument when judging it's validity and it's strength. The more specific a cause/effect claim is, the less likely it is that the cause is true and the effect is false. We could make it as specific as possible, such as:

Jim rarely gets sick.
Jim was only wearing a t-shirt and shorts.
It was 45 degreees outside.
Jim wasn't feeling ill before going for a walk.
etc etc etc.

As the book says, "we could go on forever" when making a claim as specific as possible. That's why normal conditions is essential to understanding the obvious and unstated claims that are present to establish the strength/validity between the cause and the effect.

Particular Cause and Effect:
The book defines this type as a "this happened once, then that happened once" kind of event, such as Spot barking and waking up Dick in the middle of the night. It's specific, uses specific events and sequences, and describes a specific occurence. However, we must establish a particular cause and effect event by trying to establish a generalization that describes the correlation of "Every time this happens, that happens".

General Cause and Effect:
This is where general causes and effects come in. It's a broad statement that explains the happenings of a particular cause and effect event.

In the example of Jim walking outside and catching a cold, we can make the generalization such as: "Walking outside in harsh winter conditions without protective/warming clothing can cause illness".