因果贡献度与结构因果模型——萨托莉奥模型疑难分析  

Degrees of Causal Contributions and Structural Causal Models:Troubleshooting Sartorio's Theory

作　　者：吴小安 吴东颖 WU Xiao-an;WU Tung-ying(School of Marxism,Northwestern Polytechnical University,Xi'an 710072;Institute of Philosophy,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100190,China)

机构地区：[1]西北工业大学马克思主义学院,西安710072 [2]中国科学院哲学研究所,北京100190

出　　处：《自然辩证法研究》2024年第3期45-52,共8页Studies in Dialectics of Nature

基　　金：国家社会科学基金后期资助项目“实际因果的结构方程径路研究”(21FZXB040);教育部人文社会科学项目“实际因果前沿问题研究”(21XJC720002);国家社会科学基金重大项目“当代逻辑哲学重大前沿问题研究”(17ZDA024)。

摘　　要：伦理学家卡罗莱娜·萨托莉奥开宗明义地反对存在因果贡献度这个概念,认为关于它的观念是一种“幻相”,源自一种“混淆”,不仅那些证成因果贡献度的“表象”可以通过解释来消解,而且那些用以测度因果贡献度的方法还会导致不可解决的“疑难”。根据实际因果的结构方程理论以及心理学和认知科学的研究成果,说明萨托莉奥的论证思路从前提上就错了,充分性和必要性并不是像她理解的那样是用来刻画因果贡献度的,而是用来定义因果关系的,对于规范性的考量才是因果贡献度之为可能的原因,并进一步说明,结构方程理论不能最终解决萨托莉奥的“疑难”,那也只是因为具体情形中规范的模糊性,并不构成对结构方程理论的反驳,以此捍卫了因果贡献度概念之为可能。The ethicist Carolina Sartorio argues against the notion of the existence of causal contribution,arguing that the idea of it is an"illusion"that stems from a"confusion",and that not only can the"appearances"of causal contribution be dissolved by interpretation,but that the methods used to measure it can lead to insoluble"puzzles".Drawing on structural equation theory of actual causation,as well as on findings from psychology and cognitive science,shows that Sartorio's line of argumentation is wrong from the start,that sufficiency and necessity are not used to characterize causal contribution as she understands them to be,but rather are used to define causation,and that normative considerations are what make causal contribution possible.It is further shown that structural equation theory does not conclusively resolve Sartorio's"puzzles",it is only because of the ambiguity of the norms in the specific case and does not constitute a refutation of structural equation theory,thus ultimately defending the notion of the degree of causal contribution as possible.

关 键 词：因果贡献度 结果运气 战争责任 结构因果模型 

分 类 号：N031[自然科学总论—科学技术哲学]