Abstract
Sungho Choi argued that the type of case I described to motivate my formulation of the 'actual events' clause of my theory of causation (Mind, 1999) failed to support the clause in question. He considered another type of case which might provide a justification and argues otherwise. I agree with him about the case I described but argue that he makes two unwarranted assumptions about the second case he considers. My formulation of the 'actual events' clause is justified by the fact that these assumptions need not be made for my theory to yield the correct verdicts.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 46-47 |
| Number of pages | 2 |
| Journal | Analysis |
| Volume | 62 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2002 |