What Is Causality, What Does It Mean?July 2, 2021
The relationship between cause and effect. The objective and necessary connections between natural events were also perceived by early humans. For example, the soil warmed up when the sun came out, so temperature (result) had a relationship with the sun (cause). They saw that it was always and everywhere like this and could never change, so the relationship between these two events was necessary. People had no influence on this phenomenon, and whatever they did they could not prevent this from happening, so this relationship was objective. It has been suggested that even magic and sorcery arose from these observations of people. For example, primitives who observed frogs shouting before it rained used spells to make it rain by shouting like frogs on drought days; because they believed that the same cause would produce the same effect. The causality relationship gradually gained a religious character and remained a belief for a long time as it was in the primitives.
From the regular succession of events in nature, the idea that what will happen in the future depends on what has happened in the past has been formed. The concept of ‘fatalism’ derives from this thought. Since what comes after is determined by what comes before it, so what comes before it is determined by what comes before it, and this chain must be taken up to the first determiner. Centuries later, the medieval scholastics would formulate this false reasoning with the phrase “hereinafter, therefore henceforth”, and they will continue to believe it. This is why Whitehead says, “The Greek fatalists of antiquity are the ancestors of modern scientific thought.” However, this primitive adventure of relations between events will pass through many more phases until it turns into an understanding of ‘scientific causality’. It has also led to many superstitions such as believing.
Democritus was the first thinker who sensed causality in Ancient Greek thought and claimed that there was a causal connection between events. Then, Aristotle said that “everything that occurs comes from a certain thing” and he transformed this natural regularity into logical regularity and created the method of induction. “Same causes produce the same effect” (first premise: causation principle)-Temperature expanded mines (second premise: experiment) So temperature always expands mines (conclusion: scientific law). However, the precision of this logical conclusion has been a matter of debate for a long time.
A certain number of experiments can only produce results limited to a certain number of experiments, general conclusions cannot be drawn from a certain number of experiments that exceed the limit of that certain number of experiments. Just because the sun has warmed the earth so far, we cannot know that it will warm the earth tomorrow. On the contrary, the fact that the sun has warmed the soil so far requires knowing that one day it will not warm the soil. Religious determinism gave way to scientific determinism as it gradually became known which results were born under what conditions and for what reasons. Now people began to influence and change causes and to bring about them themselves. Francis Bacon (1561-1626) summarizes this adventure of the idea of causality as follows: To truly know is to know causes. According to the French thinker Descartes (1591650) and the English thinker Hobbes (1588-1679), all things are in the necessary order of causality. According to the German philosopher Leibniz, everything has a reason (the principle of enough reason). According to the Dutch thinker Spinoza, there is no free will in essence. The Self’s will for one thing or another is necessary by reason, and so on indefinitely.
Idealists oppose scientific causality to metaphysical causation. According to the German philosopher Hegel, who put forward the most obvious form of this argument, the universe cannot be explained by causality, but by causality. Because in order to explain the universe, it is necessary to determine a ‘first principle’, such a first principle that the universe came out of it. This first principle cannot be a first cause, because it is impossible for the inexplicable to explain the universe, since we cannot explain its cause. However, this first principle can be a ‘first cause’, because its cause is essentially its inherent purpose and is explained by the cause’s purpose.
Cause tells what something is from (For example, the enlightenment of the world is from the sun), reason tells what something is for (For example, the worker’s work is to earn money). The ‘effect’ of the cause is the ‘target’ that the cause accomplishes. Making money in the above example explains the worker’s work; but the enlightenment of the world does not explain the sun. The work of the worker is to earn money; but the sun is not for the illumination of the world, on the contrary, the illumination of the world is due to the sun, so why is the sun? The sun is also probably due to something, so that the first cause is reached and the first cause remains inexplicable. Hegel’s assumption is wrong in many respects. First, there is no final effect, nor is there a first effect; The universe is eternal and eternal. After all, metaphysics