I thought that the cause effect website was useful because you can argue causation. Two rules to remember when dealing with causation are: 1. the cause must precede the event in time. 2. Even a strong correlation is insufficient to prove causation. Other possible explanations for such a strong correlation include coincidence, reversed causation, and missing something that is the cause of both the original "cause" and its purported "effect." (sjsu.edu).This means that you can have an inductive reasoning, which is a cause and effect type of reasoning. In the example on the website, it gives examples of a bicyclist who moves into the traffic lane. I think that this is a good cause effect example because the truck caused the bicyclist to swerve. People can argue these in many ways and in different perspective. I thought that the exercise was useful! I understood what commonality and differences were in the exercise. Commonality is what is the same thing the group has in common and difference is something different about the group showing the effect. This exercise was really short and I wished there was more exercises like this that I can do to understand it more. Overall, I think that the exercise helped me understand cause effect better.
Hi Aria! I agree with you that the cause and effect was in fact useful because it gave us a more broad definition on cause and effect than the book did. Now I feel that I know cause and effect better than I did before. I also talked about the two rules when dealing with causation in my own blog post. I agree that the example about the bicyclist and the two other cars getting into a car accident was a good example of cause and effect. We had to use inductive reasoning in order to find out who "caused" the accident.
ReplyDelete