Cause and Effect_Research Paper

Instructor: Brandon Williams

Huy Tran

Page 1

Cause and Effect

I. Causality principle

Problem:

• A kid throws a stone; the stone hit the window and the window

shattered.

• A chef marched and tears

• A neglected gardener did not water a tree, and the tree died

• A football player has played by hand, the referee bats him, and

control of the ball is passed to the opposing team.

• Traffic lights turn green, and one driver is waiting at the fork 4,

removing his foot from the brake pedal, pedaling on the accelerator pedal and the

car moving forward.

All these situations are very different, but all have in common: We tend to treat

these situations as related to cause and effect relationships. Each event must have a cause.

It is the fundamental law, which shows the meaning of order in nature; and it seems at

least meaningful to the lives of many.

It is necessary to consider the cause of cause and effect because it involves the

interpretation and prediction of phenomena in our daily life and the causal relationship

between things. That scientists and medical researchers are exploring.

II. The importance of the cause and effect

1. The effect of causality

• From the results to find the cause

The Law of Cause and Effect is sometimes used as a principle to explain

in the sense that if one can see what is creating, we can prove why and how it

happens.

In the popular detective novel, when a corpse is found in a closet, his

hands are tied behind his back the detective begins a series of investigations. Y

polls, sometimes the right way in the wrong direction. But he finally found the

culprit, breaking the mystery case.

Instructor: Brandon Williams

Huy Tran

Page 2

No one can understand why workers in the French Southern Rubber

plantations suffer from jaundice and acute malaria that causes many people to die

in the midst of the reddish forest, until health professionals Shows the role of

mosquitoes in transmitting disease from fountains filled with leaves and dirt.

Harry Houdini (1874-1926), as he was told, could explain the phenomenon of the

callousness of a co-worker when he used natural means to interpret the as such

phenomena.

• Increased control

Causality principle is important because the more clearly understood the

cause; the more people expand the control of natural conditions. No event can

occur if the cause did not occur before. By understanding the cause, man can stop

the event by eliminating the condition that arises. Or human beings can create

events by providing the right conditions.

In the dawn of modern times, two British philosophers Francis Bacon and

Thomas Hobbes realized the importance of the problem. Both emphasize the need

for science to focus on exploring the way events are generated or providing their

cause, in order to improve human destiny. Both clearly show that the cause is not

always clear, so it may need to be studied professionally and thoroughly.

Since the time of the two philosophers, scientists have attempted to

develop accurate methods for discovering the cause.

• Verify the philosophy

Proven to be very successful in explaining and interpreting scientific

applications, the principle of causality is also useful for philosophical inquiry.

Theologians use the argument drawn from the causal relationship to establish the

existence of God, because the cosmos – like everything within it – depends on

something different from itself to exist.

There are philosophers who embrace the general principles of empiricism

presented by Locke, Berkeley, and Hume but reluctantly accept the conclusion

that the world exists only in our ideas, they try finding a way out of solipsism by

arguing that all of our ideas must have a cause outside of us, since solipsism holds

that man can only know himself.

Instructor: Brandon Williams

Huy Tran

Page 3

• Apply to many areas

There are scientists who want to prove their predictions about what will

happen in the future; they base their faith on the uniqueness and monotony of

nature, which, in a unique sense, is a very neat and tidy way, leading to the

universal presence of causality.

There are social workers who hope to solve problems, such as juvenile

delinquency, by improving the social environment; they must rely on causal

relations to justify their view that certain conditions produce certain results.

The application of the causal principle goes beyond the illustrations. It is

possible that people living in all kinds of life situations with all kinds of interests

and preferences are considered as one of the most fundamental terms of faith.

Here, I just mean to emphasize that it is seen as a provision of faith as an

assumption.

Those who depend on it often assume that they know what they mean by

using the term “causal relationship” and that they have no doubts about its reality.

If, however, it is possible to prove that the meaning of causality is as universally

accepted as unfounded, then the result of that proof would have fallen to some of

the concepts of the universe.

2. Causality is correlated

• Not rated properly

Starting to contemplate on the principle of causation, our first impression

was that people do not seem to appreciate the importance of what they say when

they assert that “Every result must there is a cause “.

For some philosophers, it is not an eventual statement but merely a way of

surrendering to the requirements of the language. It seems like a way of saying

yes to this. It means that it is impossible to talk about the cause without

mentioning the result, just as if we refer to “hot” without referring to “cold” or

“long” without referring to “short”. In the same way, the word “cause” implies

“results,” and in itself does not prove anything but the indispensable correlation

between the two.

• Must be the correlation between events

Instructor: Brandon Williams

Huy Tran

If that principle expresses something real, it must be reduced to non–

interrelated statements that are between events: the statement that event B is

unlikely without incident a goes ahead of it and produces it. However, in practice,

it may not be easy to establish that relationship.

By suggesting that event A is preceded by event B and triggers event B, it

seems to imply that both events are different. If they are indeed different, the

statement that this event causes the event is so confusing. How does a natural

event produce something completely different from it? Where did the new event

occur? If the results are completely different from the cause, there is a hole

between them that needs to be filled, and causality does not seem to be enough to

fill the hole.

If the cause and effect are not different then it seems they must be the

same. If they are the same then it is difficult to understand how the new thing is

likely to happen to the old one.

Here, we almost face a problem. Assuming that B is different from A, it is