Causation in the social sciences: Evidence, inference, and purpose

Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (1):20-40 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

All univocal analyses of causation face counterexamples. An attractive response to this situation is to become a pluralist about causal relationships. "Causal pluralism" is itself, however, a pluralistic notion. In this article, I argue in favor of pluralism about concepts of cause in the social sciences. The article will show that evidence for, inference from, and the purpose of causal claims are very closely linked. Key Words: causation • pluralism • evidence • methodology.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-02-07

Downloads
249 (#106,270)

6 months
19 (#153,354)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

The Ontic Account of Scientific Explanation.Carl F. Craver - 2014 - In Marie I. Kaiser, Oliver R. Scholz, Daniel Plenge & Andreas Hüttemann (eds.), Explanation in the special science: The case of biology and history. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 27-52.
Applying Evidential Pluralism to the Social Sciences.Yafeng Shan & Jon Williamson - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (4):1-27.
A Pragmatist Theory of Evidence.Julian Reiss - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (3):341-362.
Is 'Cause' Ambiguous?Phil Corkum - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179:2945-71.

View all 29 citations / Add more citations