4 ms·
The idea that there are "causes" and that there are "effects", and that these are separate and distinct, is in some way on a parallel with the idea that the pas
by acyou 4y ago
The idea that there are "causes" and that there are "effects", and that these are separate and distinct, is in some way on a parallel with the idea that the past influences the future, and vice versa. If we think that the past influences the future, then it's just as reasonable to think that the future influences the past. Personally, I view "causes" and "effects" as abstractions that we use to help interpret our complicated world, nothing more.
That's not to say that it's not legitimate to talk about causes and effects and to reason using them, but when seriously considered, anything that absolutely looks like definitely a cause or an effect, needs to be considered again with the system boundaries re-drawn, that is to say, with the system boundaries drawn around the whole universe.
Take for example the cigarette lighting the forest on fire. Saying that the cigarette caused the fire is as much of a value judgement and political statement as saying that the decades-long drought caused the fire, or that humans causing global warming caused the fire, or that the cigarette companies caused the fire, or that God caused the fire. The emotional response that each of these statements elicits in various people should tell you that any statement linking cause and effect is emotional and political at its core. This reflects the nature of the humans that create these statements.
We have a built-in tendency to try to assign causes to events and effects. We should zoom out enough to understand that this is part of our humanity, not part of the way that the universe works.