Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:50:27.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Counterfactuals, Thought Experiments, and Singular Causal Analysis in History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Julian Reiss
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thought experiments are ubiquitous in science and especially prominent in domains in which experimental and observational evidence is scarce. One such domain is the causal analysis of singular events in history. A long-standing tradition that goes back to Max Weber addresses the issue by means of ‘what-if’ counterfactuals. In this paper I give a descriptive account of this widely used method and argue that historians following it examine difference makers rather than causes in the philosopher's sense. While difference making is neither necessary nor sufficient for causation, to establish difference makers is more consistent with the historians’ more ultimate purposes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 76 , Issue 5 , December 2009 , pp. 712 - 723
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hanson, Victor Davis (2006), “A Stillborn West? Themistocles at Salamis, 480 BC”, in Tetlock, Philip, Lebow, Richard Ned, and Parker, Geoffrey (eds.), Unmaking the West: “What-If?” Scenarios That Rewrite World History. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 47–89.Google Scholar
Khong, Yuen Foong (1996), “Confronting Hitler and Its Consequences”, in Philip Tetlock and Aaron Belkin 1996, 95–118.Google Scholar
Lebow, Richard Ned, and Stein, Janice Gross (1996), “Back to the Past: Counterfactuals and the Cuban Missile Crisis”, in Philip Tetlock and Aaron Belkin 1996, 119–148.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (1973), “Causation”, Causation 70 (8): 556–567..Google Scholar
Lewis, David (1979), “Counterfactual Dependence and Time's Arrow”, Counterfactual Dependence and Time's Arrow 13 (4): 455–476..Google Scholar
Tetlock, Philip, and Belkin, Aaron, eds. (1996), Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics: Logical, Methodological and Psychological Perspectives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Max ([1905] 1949), “Objective Possibility and Adequate Causation in Historical Explanation”, in The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Edited and translated by Shils, Edward and Finch, Henry. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 164–188. Originally published in Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik.Google Scholar