Causal Quotes

Authors: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Categories: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
causal-analysis-provides-absolutely-no-value-judgment-value-judgment-is-absolutely-not-causal-explanation-max-weber
with-the-truth-you-can-be-quite-causal-with-lying-you-must-be-very-exact
superstition-is-belief-in-causal-nexus-ludwig-wittgenstein
belief-in-causal-nexus-is-superstition-ludwig-wittgenstein
now-there-is-apparently-causal-link-between-heroin-addiction-vegetarianism-irvine-welsh
in-meditation-as-you-go-into-causal-dimensions-planes-light-you-will-be-purified-energized-you-will-become-wise-frederick-lenz
the-causal-body-is-like-dna-rna-in-that-it-is-coding-that-determines-your-level-evolution-frederick-lenz
the-causal-structure-determines-rate-method-evolution-your-awareness-universe-frederick-lenz
what-i-liked-much-while-shooting-movie-i-might-not-like-anymore-when-i-see-it-vice-versa-the-two-are-connected-but-not-on-causal-level-christoph-waltz
methodological-individualism-is-doctrine-that-psychological-states-are-individuated-with-respect-to-their-causal-powers-jerry-fodor
perceived-selfefficacy-influences-types-causal-attributions-people-make-for-their-performances-albert-bandura
we-cannot-even-given-our-most-imaginative-efforts-construct-concept-self-that-does-not-impute-some-causal-influence-prior-mental-states-on-later-jerome-bruner
thought-is-the-organizing-factor-in-man-intersected-between-the-causal-primary-instincts-and-the-resulting-actions
your-experiences-in-causal-dimensions-will-give-you-knowledge-time-space-dimensionality-what-lies-beyond-all-these-things-frederick-lenz
that-is-to-say-natures-laws-are-causal-they-reveal-themselves-by-comparison-difference-they-operate-at-every-multivariate-spacetime-point
that-is-to-say-natures-laws-are-causal-they-reveal-themselves-by-comparison-difference-they-operate-at-every-multivariate-space-time-point-edward-tufte
the-universe-as-we-see-it-is-result-regularly-working-forces-having-causal-connection-with-each-other-therefore-capable-being-understood-by-human-ludwig-buchner
for-scientific-theory-him-to-be-possible-man-including-his-habits-valuation-has-to-be-taken-as-determined-by-causal-laws-as-instance-part-nature
history-creates-comprehensibility-primarily-by-arranging-facts-meaningfully-only-in-limited-sense-by-establishing-strict-causal-connections
both-these-branches-evolutionary-science-are-in-my-opinion-in-closest-causal-connection-this-arises-from-reciprocal-action-laws-heredity-ernst-haeckel
karma-is-sum-total-who-you-are-everything-youve-been-the-mind-state-you-are-in-is-karmic-meaning-its-related-by-causal-chain-existences-moments-frederick-lenz
the-causal-body-is-part-person-that-lives-forever-it-is-what-you-would-call-soul-it-doesnt-dissolve-along-with-physical-astral-bodies-at-end-frederick-lenz
we-cannot-imagine-events-that-are-connected-noncausally-are-capable-noncausal-explanation-but-that-does-not-mean-that-such-events-do-not-exist-carl-jung
it-is-possible-to-modify-your-awareness-to-perceive-what-plants-perceive-birds-beings-in-astral-causal-frederick-lenz
when-you-go-into-causal-realms-you-become-someone-else-the-light-vibrates-quickly-you-will-see-that-you-are-concurrence-light-taken-shape-form-frederick-lenz
the-causal-body-is-part-you-that-lives-forever-it-is-ancient-complicated-it-has-lived-through-countless-lives-in-both-this-in-other-worlds-frederick-lenz
beyond-astral-dimensions-are-causal-dimensions-they-are-not-spatial-time-oriented-they-are-planes-light-they-make-up-outer-limits-nirvana-frederick-lenz
i-am-imperfect-man-living-in-imperfect-world-trying-to-weave-through-chaotic-interactions-semicausal-events-with-linear-logic-contradictory-emotions-dialectic-wisdom-mortal-integ
karma-is-simply-law-cause-effect-in-action-all-moments-occurrences-are-caused-by-other-moments-occurrences-that-preceded-them-in-endless-causal-frederick-lenz
the-intuitive-mind-is-nonphysical-it-is-not-part-brain-any-other-cellular-structure-in-physical-body-it-is-part-causal-body-frederick-lenz
the-knowledge-of-the-causal-power-of-thought-is-the-basis-of-all-their-hebrew-prophecies-as-it-is-the-basis-of-all-real-wisdom-and-power
insofar-as-it-is-true-idea-that-our-actions-beliefs-are-merely-one-link-in-causal-link-that-runs-back-to-beginning-universe-is-making-trivial-claim-insofar-as-it-is-saying-someth
But it so happens that everything on this planet is, ultimately, irrational; there is not, and cannot be, any reason for the causal connexion of things, if only because our use of the word "reason" already implies the idea of causal connexion. But, even if we avoid this fundamental difficulty, Hume said that causal connexion was not merely unprovable, but unthinkable; and, in shallower waters still, one cannot assign a true reason why water should flow down hill, or sugar taste sweet in the mouth. Attempts to explain these simple matters always progress into a learned lucidity, and on further analysis retire to a remote stronghold where every thing is irrational and unthinkable. If you cut off a man's head, he dies. Why? Because it kills him. That is really the whole answer. Learned excursions into anatomy and physiology only beg the question; it does not explain why the heart is necessary to life to say that it is a vital organ. Yet that is exactly what is done, the trick that is played on every inquiring mind. Why cannot I see in the dark? Because light is necessary to sight. No confusion of that issue by talk of rods and cones, and optical centres, and foci, and lenses, and vibrations is very different to Edwin Arthwait's treatment of the long-suffering English language. Knowledge is really confined to experience. The laws of Nature are, as Kant said, the laws of our minds, and, as Huxley said, the generalization of observed facts. It is, therefore, no argument against ceremonial magic to say that it is "absurd" to try to raise a thunderstorm by beating a drum; it is not even fair to say that you have tried the experiment, found it would not work, and so perceived it to be "impossible." You might as well claim that, as you had taken paint and canvas, and not produced a Rembrandt, it was evident that the pictures attributed to his painting were really produced in quite a different way. You do not see why the skull of a parricide should help you to raise a dead man, as you do not see why the mercury in a thermometer should rise and fall, though you elaborately pretend that you do; and you could not raise a dead man by the aid of the skull of a parricide, just as you could not play the violin like Kreisler; though in the latter case you might modestly add that you thought you could learn. This is not the special pleading of a professed magician; it boils down to the advice not to judge subjects of which you are perfectly ignorant, and is to be found, stated in clearer and lovelier language, in the Essays of Thomas Henry Huxley.

Aleister Crowley
but-it-happens-that-everything-on-this-planet-is-ultimately-irrational-there-is-not-cannot-be-any-reason-for-causal-connexion-things-if-only-because-our-use-word-reason-already-i
Among the many symbols used to frighten and manipulate the populace of the democratic states, few have been more important than "terror" and "terrorism." These terms have generally been confined to the use of violence by individuals and marginal groups. Official violence, which is far more extensive in both scale and destructiveness, is placed in a different category altogether. This usage has nothing to do with justice, causal sequence, or numbers abused. Whatever the actual sequence of cause and effect, official violence is described as responsive or provoked ("retaliation, " "protective reaction, " etc.), not as the active and initiating source of abuse. Similarly, the massive long-term violence inherent in the oppressive social structures that U.S. power has supported or imposed is typically disregarded. The numbers tormented and killed by official violence-wholesale as opposed to retail terror-during recent decades have exceeded those of unofficial terrorists by a factor running into the thousands. But this is not "terror, " [... ] "security forces" only retaliate and engage in "police action." These terminological devices serve important functions. They help to justify the far more extensive violence of (friendly) state authorities by interpreting them as "reactive" and they implicitly sanction the suppression of information on the methods and scale of official violence by removing it from the category of "terrorism." [... ] Thus the language is well-designed for apologetics for wholesale terror.

Noam Chomsky
among-many-symbols-used-to-frighten-manipulate-populace-democratic-states-few-have-been-more-important-than-terror-terrorism-these-terms-have-generally-been-confined-to-use-viole
Why anyone's argument for god(s) is fallacious, especially as a causal agent: Imagine Michael and Jessica are at Jimmy's house sitting at the kitchen table. Jessica steps outside to take a phone call. When she returns her drink is spilled. Jessica asks, 'How did my drink get knocked over?' Michael replies, 'It was a SnickerDoodle.' J: 'What's a SnickerDoodle?' M: 'It looks a little like an elephant but it is small, pink, and invisible.' J: 'Is it invisible or pink? It can't be both.' M: 'Well, it is. You can't understand what the SnickerDoodle looks like.' J: 'Zip it. SnickerDoodle's are not real. How did my drink get knocked over?' M: 'Well, it was Jimmy's cat, but it was because he was chasing the SnickerDoodle, so the SnickerDoodle made him do it.' J: 'Stop with the SnickerDoodle, you weirdo.' M: 'Just kidding, it was Jimmy's cat, I don't know why.' We have no reason to believe that SnickerDoodle's are real. Without SnickerDoodles being established as possible causes to drinks being knocked down, then there is no point to discussing them as the cause of Jessica's drink being knocked over. In similar fashion, we have to establish that cats are a possible reason that drinks get knocked down. Okay, we have established that cats are real and capable of doing so. It is now a viable option, but in order for Michael's story have any plausibility, we not only have to establish that a cat did it, we have to establish that it was Jimmy's cat, or that Jimmy even has a cat. Believers cannot get to step one, establishing that any god is even a viable option on the list of possibilities. Then even if gods were proven to be real, you still have to prove that it was your particular god, or that your particular god exists. To argue that your god is real, is like Michael arguing that Jimmy's SnickerDoodle knocked over Jessica's drink. Can grown-adults take that argument seriously? Really?

Michael A. Wood Jr.
why-anyones-argument-for-gods-is-fallacious-especially-as-causal-agent-imagine-michael-jessica-are-at-jimmys-house-sitting-at-kitchen-table-jessica-steps-outside-to-take-phone-ca
Professor Smith has kindly submitted his book to me before publication. After reading it thoroughly and with intense interest I am glad to comply with his request to give him my impression. The work is a broadly conceived attempt to portray man's fear-induced animistic and mythic ideas with all their far-flung transformations and interrelations. It relates the impact of these phantasmagorias on human destiny and the causal relationships by which they have become crystallized into organized religion. This is a biologist speaking, whose scientific training has disciplined him in a grim objectivity rarely found in the pure historian. This objectivity has not, however, hindered him from emphasizing the boundless suffering which, in its end results, this mythic thought has brought upon man. Professor Smith envisages as a redeeming force, training in objective observation of all that is available for immediate perception and in the interpretation of facts without preconceived ideas. In his view, only if every individual strives for truth can humanity attain a happier future; the atavisms in each of us that stand in the way of a friendlier destiny can only thus be rendered ineffective. His historical picture closes with the end of the nineteenth century, and with good reason. By that time it seemed that the influence of these mythic, authoritatively anchored forces which can be denoted as religious, had been reduced to a tolerable level in spite of all the persisting inertia and hypocrisy. Even then, a new branch of mythic thought had already grown strong, one not religious in nature but no less perilous to mankind - exaggerated nationalism. Half a century has shown that this new adversary is so strong that it places in question man's very survival. It is too early for the present-day historian to write about this problem, but it is to be hoped that one will survive who can undertake the task at a later date.

Albert Einstein
professor-smith-has-kindly-submitted-his-book-to-me-before-publication-after-reading-it-thoroughly-with-intense-interest-i-am-glad-to-comply-with-his-request-to-give-him-my-impre
For Aristotle the literary plot was analogous to the plot of the world in that both were eductions from the potency of matter. Sartre denies this for the world, and specifically denies, in the passage just referred to, that without potentiality there is no change. He reverts to the Megaric view of the matter, which Aristotle took such trouble to correct. But this is not our affair. The fact is that even if you believe in a Megaric world there is no such thing as a Megaric novel; not even Paterson. Change without potentiality in a novel is impossible, quite simply; though it is the hopeless aim of the cut-out writers, and the card-shuffle writers. A novel which really implemented this policy would properly be a chaos. No novel can avoid being in some sense what Aristotle calls 'a completed action.' This being so, all novels imitate a world of potentiality, even if this implies a philosophy disclaimed by their authors. They have a fixation on the eidetic imagery of beginning, middle, and end, potency and cause. Novels, then, have beginnings, ends, and potentiality, even if the world has not. In the same way it can be said that whereas there may be, in the world, no such thing as character, since a man is what he does and chooses freely what he does-and in so far as he claims that his acts are determined by psychological or other predisposition he is a fraud, le¢che, or salaud-in the novel there can be no just representation of this, for if the man were entirely free he might simply walk out of the story, and if he had no character we should not recognize him. This is true in spite of the claims of the doctrinaire nouveau roman school to have abolished character. And Sartre himself has a powerful commitment to it, though he could not accept the Aristotelian position that it is through character that plot is actualized. In short, novels have characters, even if the world has not. What about time? It is, effectively, a human creation, according to Sartre, and he likes novels because they concern themselves only with human time, a faring forward irreversibly into a virgin future from ecstasy to ecstasy, in his word, from kairos to kairos in mine. The future is a fluid medium in which I try to actualize my potency, though the end is unattainable; the present is simply the pour-soi., 'human consciousness in its flight out of the past into the future.' The past is bundled into the en-soi, and has no relevance. 'What I was is not the foundation of what I am, any more than what I am is the foundation of what I shall be.' Now this is not novel-time. The faring forward is all right, and fits the old desire to know what happens next; but the denial of all causal relation between disparate kairoi, which is after all basic to Sartre's treatment of time, makes form impossible, and it would never occur to us that a book written to such a recipe, a set of discontinuous epiphanies, should be called a novel. Perhaps we could not even read it thus: the making of a novel is partly the achievement of readers as well as writers, and readers would constantly attempt to supply the very connections that the writer's programme suppresses. In all these ways, then, the novel falsifies the philosophy.

Frank Kermode
for-aristotle-literary-plot-was-analogous-to-plot-world-in-that-both-were-eductions-from-potency-matter-sartre-denies-this-for-world-specifically-denies-in-passage-just-referred-
?Earn cash when you save a quote by clicking
EARNED Load...
LEVEL : Load...