Proportionality and omissions

摘要

In response to the exclusion argument against mental causation, Yablon(1992, 1997) proposes a proportionality constraint on what can count as ancause: where distinct, simultaneous putative causes involve properties thatnstand in the determinable/determinate relation, only the property that is pro-nportional to the effect counts as the cause. The having of property C is pro-nportional to effect E if and only if (i) for any determinable C* of C, had C*nobtained without C, E would not have obtained, and (ii) for any determinatenC0nof C, had C obtained without C0n, E would still have obtained. In Yablo’snterminology, where (i) holds we say C* does not screen off C from E, andnwhere (ii) holds we say C screens off C0nfrom E.So C is proportional to E iffnnone of its determinables screen it off, and it screens off all its determinatesn(Yablo 1997: 267). Proportionality is itself an exclusion principle: only one inna set of properties related by the determinate/determinable relation can benproportional to a specific effect.