Can there be cause and effect without time?

The answer is still “no” but depends on how you set up causes and effects. It is usually possible to find a reference frame where two events are simultaneous but one cannot cause the other unless there is time for light to get from the one to the other. The cause must be in the past light cone of the effect.

Can cause and effect exist without time?

∴ Unless a single object can exist in two places, or otherwise maintain two non-identical states, change can only occur over time. ∴ Cause and effect can only occur over time.

Is time a cause and effect?

Quote from the video:
Youtube quote: Human scale concepts of cause and effect only emerge when you have larger collections of particles like humans as we know time does have a direction for larger scale systems.

Can there be effect without cause?

‘Cause’ and ‘effect’ are conceptually joined. You can’t have an effect without a cause since to call something an effect is to imply that it has a cause – and to call something a cause is to imply that it has an effect. This belongs to the logic of the two concepts. However, there can be events without a cause.

See also  Can there be intention without an intender?

Is there really cause and effect?

Do they really exist? It turns out that on the tiny, tiny level that physics works on, the answer is no. The equations that rule the physical world make no indication of a causation direction, only changes in states over time.

Can time be defined?

Scientific Definition

Physicists define time as the progression of events from the past to the present into the future. Basically, if a system is unchanging, it is timeless. Time can be considered to be the fourth dimension of reality, used to describe events in three-dimensional space.

Is it necessary that there is a cause before an effect?

The cause must occur before the effect. Whenever the cause occurs, the effect must also occur. There must not be another factor that can explain the relationship between the cause and effect.

Is cause and effect a law?

The law of cause and effect is a universal law which specifically states that every single action in the universe produces a reaction no matter what. Every single effect within our world, upon our earth has a cause, an original starting point.

Is cause and effect an illusion?

However, inferences about cause and effect do not always demonstrate understanding of mechanisms underlying causality; causality has been described as “cognitive illusion”. Much understanding of cause and effect is based on associations, without an understanding of how events are related to one another.

What is the relationship between cause and effect?

The cause is why the event happens. The effect is what happened. Sometimes there can be more than one cause and effect. This occurs when one cause brings about an effect; then that effect becomes the cause for another effect.

See also  What is the idea behind "p or not p" being a tautology?

Why does Hume think cause and effect doesn’t exist?

Hume argues that we cannot conceive of any other connection between cause and effect, because there simply is no other impression to which our idea may be traced. This certitude is all that remains. For Hume, the necessary connection invoked by causation is nothing more than this certainty.

Is cause and effect a priori?

Here, an argument a priori is said to be “from causes to the effect” and an argument a posteriori to be “from effects to causes.” Similar definitions were given by many later philosophers down to and including Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), and the expressions still occur sometimes with these meanings in …

Does Hume believe in God?

I offer a reading of Hume’s writings on religion which preserves the many criticisms of established religion that he voiced, but also reveals that Hume believed in a genuine theism and a true religion. At the heart of this belief system is Hume’s affirmation that there is a god, although not a morally good.

What do Kant and Hume agree on?

Hume and Kant both treat the concepts of virtue and vice as central to human morality. But they differ on the basic nature of virtue, and they present different catalogues of particular virtues and vices. Kant’s discussions reflect his consistent emphasis on freedom, dignity, rationality, and purity of motive.