[MD] Quick one: causation

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[ian]
> Many things that can be fully explained only in hindsight

Take a game of pool or pocket billiards.
One can explain the 8-ball going in the side pocket by saying it bounced off the side rail
or explain the 8-ball going in the corner pocket by saying it bounced off the end rail.  Both
explanations can be given before the event occurs, but the CORRECT explanation of what
ACTUALLY occurs might not be KNOWN until afterwards.
Is this what you had in mind?  Or do you think some events can be explained either before
or after they happen, while other events can only be explained afterwards.
If the latter, what would be an example?

[ian]
> There are two-way causal processes between the lower and higher
> levels, and it is not helpful to think of these effects as
> "causation" in the traditional sense

When someone has had too much alcohol, their thinking becomes muddled.
When someone is frightened, they think they see things in shaddows.
Why is it “not helpful to think of these effects as ‘causation’ in the traditional sense”?
Craig