Reference and Glossary
The below is a reference for you when drawing your CAUSAL circuits. Some things to remember:
When you don’t have the TIMING, MECHANISM, or DATA that you believe you want, you can put in an empty box.
Just as Backing is not present in every deductive argument, backing elements of a causal argument aren’t always there either. Take what you DO have, put it where it goes, and evaluate.
Counterarguments & Rebuttals are not present in most causal arguments. When they are, they can be diagrammed just as in deductive arguments.
-
The cause should occur before the effect, establishing a temporal sequence.
-
The proposed cause-and-effect relationship should make sense based on existing knowledge and theories. This plausible mechanism functions much like deductive minor premises, as it is a presentation of facts related to the cause just as minor premises present facts related to the subject of the claim.
-
The causal relationship should not contradict known facts and theories about how the world works. This includes dismissal of specious factors such as a Confounding Factor (something that correlates with both the Cause and the Effect giving the false impression that it is the true Cause) or an Alternate Cause (one that seems rational but lacks data or other supporting facts).
-
If similar factors are known to produce similar effects, this may support the causality of a new, related factor and effect.
-
A strong correlation between two factors suggests a potential causal link.
“Strength” in this sense can refer to statistical significance (the measure of the probability that the occurrence is due to a real and meaningful effect rather than by chance) or magnitude of the association (the probability that the effect happens in the presence of the cause).
-
Greater exposure to the potential cause should lead to a greater incidence of the effect, suggesting a causal connection.
-
Any experimental manipulation that alters the supposed cause should change the effect, reinforcing the cause-and-effect relationship.
-
Repeated observations of the association under different circumstances and settings strengthen the argument for causality.
-
If a specific factor consistently leads to a specific outcome, this supports the notion of causality, though this is less definitive in complex systems with multiple interacting causes.