Causality and Medicine

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 1 (4):301-317 (1976)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The philosophers of science who viewed causality as a metaphysical headache were right. Yet when they concluded that it is of no scientific import and of less practical import, they were clearly in error. I say clearly because they thereby recommended that we replace cause by mere empirical correlation, which obviously will not do. Here is an obvious example which proves them in error without even touching upon the question of what science is.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,518

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Changing Ideas of Causality in Medicine.Eric Cassell - 1979 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 46.
From notions of health to causality.Wim Dekkers & Bert Gordijn - 2009 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 12 (3):231-233.
Editorial: The troublesome concept of causality.W. Dekkers & B. Gordjin - 2006 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (3):267-267.
Treatment Effectiveness and the Russo–Williamson Thesis, EBM+, and Bradford Hill's Viewpoints.Steven Tresker - 2021 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 34 (3):131-158.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
113 (#191,038)

6 months
7 (#749,523)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joseph Agassi
York University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references