The cause and effect website explained a new type of reasoning to me that I’m still a little unclear about. To argue causation is a way to argue over many different topics that are found in today’s world. For example the court systems are often the locations where causal arguing is used to win cases. Now as I said before I am still a little unclear about this topic, so if I happen to post incorrect information, please leave me a comment and help me out. For every action in this world there is a reaction. Like the example the website gave, how since there was a truck parked in the bike lane, the bicyclist had to swerve around it. Let’s look at an example I came up with: Two boys are wrestling and one boy (Boy B) accidentally breaks his arm. Let’s say this happened because Boy A picked him up and slammed him to the ground. Boy B put his arm out to stop his fall, but ended up breaking it. Now, is the cause of Boy B’s broken arm cause of wrestling, or is it because Boy A picked him up and slammed him? In my mind I do not know for sure, but I am going to guess it was the fact that they were wrestling in the first place. This brings up the part of the website that explains normality. Because wrestling is dangerous, couldn’t this normally happen? Or was Boy A wreck less and normally wouldn’t slam Boy B to the ground?
No comments:
Post a Comment