causality insocialscience

Causality in Social Sciences

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Research and Training Institute (SCSTRTI), Bhubaneswar

and Nabakrushna Choudhury Centre for Development Studies (NCDS), Bhubaneswar

Srijit Mishra

Certificate Course in Advanced Research Methodology 13-27 May 2016 (Lecture on 15 May 2016)

Aspects to be Discussed

• Causality through the prism of social sciences

• Causality: why something happened

• Causality: factual or theoretical

• Weak versus strong causation

• Separable cause

• Two causal factors: eight possibilities

• Causality: a logical construct

• INUS condition of causality

• Summing up

15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 2

Causality through the prism of Social Sciences

• Uncertainty (measures lack precision)

In understanding causality it may help to move from uncertainty to near certain things, rather than from certainty to uncertainty.

• Role of time (and space)

There is a temporal (and also spatial) element to facts that we deal with

• Role in decision-making

The implication of their consequences are profound

3 15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

Causality: Why something Happened?

• Is it an act of a BEING or BEINGS

• Or, is it the Hand of GOD

• Can an explanation be good or bad? No, it should be independent of any moral judgment

• By hand of GOD, do we mean divine origin? No, when we get into a God/Devil discourse in our explanation then we move into a realm where we do not have answers; it takes as away from a scientific discourse


Recapitulate: Prism of Social sciences and What not to look for

• Advantages in understanding causality through the prism of social sciences: deals with the uncertain, brings in the context of time and space, involves decision making that have profound implications.

• What is causality can be answered by explaining why something happened. In looking at answers one should keep it independent of moral judgements (explanation cannot be ascribed to be good or bad) and one should keep away from ascribing reasons to the Devine or Devil forces.


Causality: Factual or Theoretical

• A causes B (both A and B are facts)

• It implies that if A would not have occurred in the first place then neither would have B

• It follows: if not-A, then not-B

• But, not-A and not-B are not facts; they have not occurred

• A counterfactual, the basis of which may be some theory

• Double vision: ex ante and ex-post


Weak versus Strong causation

• A is one of the causes of B (weak causation)

• A is the sole cause of B (strong causation)

• Strong causation denies other possible causes

• Strong causation implies weak causation

• Strong implies a weak causation for A, plus a denial of weak causation for other possibilities

• Weak causation is the basic one


Separable Cause

• A existed, and

• B existed

• Hypothetical construct of not-A ceteris paribus

• If not-A then B would not have existed

If A passes the above test then it is a separable cause of B


Recapitulate: factual and theoretical, strong and weak, and separable

• While causality is to explain relationship between facts (the cause A lead to the effect B), a critical understanding requires an agreement that not-A would lead to not-B. This agreement is not based on facts, as not-A and not-B have not occurred; they are based on a theoretical construct.

• If A is one of the causes it is a weak causation; if A is the only cause then it is a strong causation. Weak causation is the basic one.

• If A and B are facts and the hypothetical construct of not-A implies not-B then A is a separable cause of B.


Two causal factors, eight Possibilities Not-A1 Not-A2 Not-A12 Remarks

Not-B Not-B Not-B Additive causes

Not-B B Not-B A1 Separable cause

B Not-B Not-B A2 Separable cause

B B B None cause

B B Not-B Overlapping causes

Not-B B B A2 Negative cause

B Not-B B A1 Negative cause

Not-B Not-B B Both negative 10 15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

Recapitulate: two causal factors, eight possibilities

(1) Both A1 and A2 are independently and together separable; they are additive causes

(2 and 3) Only A1 or only A2 is a separable cause

(4) Neither of them are separable causes, either independently or together

(5) Independently, neither of them are separable. But, together they are separable; overlapping cause

(6 and 7) One of them is separable independently, but not jointly; the one that is not separable independently is the negative cause

(8) Both of them are separable independently. But, together they are not separable. Both are negative causes.


Causality: A Logical Construct

Necessary condition

• A is necessary for B; B only if A or B implies A

Sufficient condition

• A is sufficient for B; if A then B or A implies B

Revisits the role of time

• Sequential (traditional thinking)

• Can be contemporaneous (at the same time)

• Static (permanencies, independent of time)


INUS Condition of Causality

• Insufficient but non-redundant part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition

A1+A2→B1

A3+A4→B1

A1+A5→B2

• A1 is not sufficient on its own. However, A1 as part of a non-redundant group (A1+A2) is not necessary but sufficient


Recapitulate: logical construct, and INUS condition

• Logical construct:

If A is a necessary condition for B,

then B is a sufficient condition for A

• Revisits the role of time

Sequential, Contemporaneous, Static (Independent)

• INUS condition of causality

A1 is independently insufficient, but is a non-redundant part of something that is together unnecessary but sufficient


Summing-up

• Advantages of a prism of social sciences • What not to do while explaining causality • Moving from factual to a theoretical construct • Weak causation – one of the possible causes; strong

causation – the sole cause • Agreement on the theoretical construct of a cause makes it

a separable cause • If there are two causes, then there can be eight possibilities

based on them being separable • The logical construct: necessary and sufficient conditions; it

also revisits the role of time • The most important one – the INUS condition


References

Basic Readings:

• Hicks, John (1979) Causality in Economics, Basic Books, New York. (Chapters 1 and 2)

• Mackie, JL (1965) Causes and Conditions American Philosophical Quarterly, 2(4): 245-264, 1965

Additional Readings:

• Hume, David (1739) A Treatise of Human Nature (see Book I Part III)

• Piaget, Jean (1930) The Child’s Conception of Physical Causality: Summary and Conclusion.


http://www.jstor.org/stable/20009173

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4705/4705-h/4705-h.htm

http://www.telacommunications.com/nutshell/childs-conception-of-physical-causality.htm

http://www.telacommunications.com/nutshell/childs-conception-of-physical-causality.htm

causality insocialscience

Economy & Finance