Is there an ONTOLOGICAL link between CAUSE & EFFECT or is the link merely a PSYCHOLOGICAL one?

Question

We have all experienced - in one way or another - the causal link between a cause and it's effect. One thing seems to be the cause of another - fire causes smoke, etc.

According to David Hume, there is no causal link or ontological link between cause and effect. What we perceive as the ontological connection between the two is merely a psychological link. What Hume means by this is that we observe one thing coming as a result of another, and after observing this a number of times we infer the cause/effect principle on what we see. So this connection is nothing but the work of our cognitive faculty (reason or the mind), hence his so-called 'psychological link' which arises from what he calls "custom" or "habit".

For example: being a smoker, I have associated the habit/custom of smoking a cigarrette with what seems to be it's effect, namely the relief of stress or the calming of nerves, etc. Is this cause-effect link an ontological one or merely an association made by the mind?

Answer 1

Hume developed Locke's empiricism (all knowledge from sense experience) to its logical conclusion (skepticism).

Hume denied causation on the grounds that cause cannot be empirically verified (only effects).

What Hume failed to recognize is that reason is ontological (applies to being as well as to thought).

For example,
1) There are no square circles (figure with four equal sides, four 90 degree corners whose center to surface distance (radius) is the same in any direction).

2) There are no uncaused events.

3) There is no being (with quality) from non-being (absence of quality).

If a proposition violates a law of thought (Logos) it also violates a law of being (Ontos) and therefore cannot exist.

Hume's skepticism is rooted in his uncritically held assumption of empiricism.

Hume can be responded to by asking if there are innate ideas (concepts) of reason. If so, what might they be?

Is knowledge possible in this area?

Good question.

Answer 2

There is a semantic link between the word's 'cause' and 'effect' because they are related by definition. Proving that an effect in the real world is the result of a single cause in the real world is extremely difficult because there are so many confounding conditions and coexistent forces at work. Hume pointed out and understood that the idea that there is a necessary connection between a cause and an effect is impossible to prove by the method of induction. So he resorted to, or rather he fell back on, a simplistic psychological explanation, which considering his disdain for the existence of intangible minds, was a self-contradicting vacuous conceptualization of real world scientific causation. I personally believe his position was a product of his lack of information or his limited scientific knowledge which became available a 100 years after he died in 1776.

Answer 3

Logically, the whole cause & effect thing gets a bit tricky when you consider the nature of time.

If time just started up one day out of the blue, then the first event had no cause, because there was no time for anything to happen in before that. This would mean that cause and effect actually aren't that related to each other, because if you can have one effect without a cause, you can have others like that too.

On the other hand, if time is infinite, the previous logic doesn't work because there was no "first" event. The easiest way to imagine this is like a loop of video. The event at the end of the video could cause the event at the beginning of the next loop.

Which probably doesn't actually answer your question, heh. But, I personally think that cause and effect happen regardless of our psychological experience of them. However, my attempts to logically explain why didn't come out making very much sense so I deleted them. :P

Answer 4

Actual cause and effect is very difficult to prove. We can know that they are related somehow, but there's almost no way to know that one causes the other. For instance, they say smoking causes cancer, but what if cancer causes smoking? (i.e. people who are about to spring up with tumors have the urge to smoke). I agree with Hume. Just perception most of the time. Humans like to understand their world and force everything into neat little boxes.

Answer 5

There is a definite connection of Cause and Effect to Cancer. The connection is this: When a person is consumed with anger and hate and does not forgive the other person and just harbors that anger and hatred-negativity, within their being, sooner or later it becomes a poison within their system and will manifest in a negative way in the body, i.e. Cancer! It is not Psychosomatic!

Answer 6

I tell you what: find something you have not experienced, like standing in the middle of the road while an 18-wheeler comes at you. Let me know if there is no effect because you do not know what to expect. I'll see you in the hospital, if you survive.

Answer 7

Madd respect for Hume, but he was too skeptical sometimes...

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction (thus cause and effect)