Is the cause a necessary condition for the effect, independently of cont?

1. Consider the following causal claim: If I pass this course, I鈥檒l graduate.





a) Is the cause a necessary condition for the effect, independently of context? Why or why not?





b) Is the cause a sufficient condition, independently of the context? Why or why not?





c) What context we must assume for the cause to be necessary and sufficient?











2. A psychiatrist had six adult female patients who suffered blurred ego boundaries. These patients were distinguished by the following characteristics. Meg and Sue had both been subjected to corporal punishment as children and both had siblings. Ashley and Jane were adopted, had a male parent figure, and experienced sexual abuse. Lynn and Fiona had siblings and a male parent figure, but only Fiona had a domineering mother. Also, Lynn and Meg had experienced sexual abuse and were adopted, but only Meg had a domineering mother. Jane and Ashley were uprooted often as children. Fiona and Sue had experienced sexual abuse, but only Sue was raised in day-care centres. Jane and Ashley each had a domineering mother and each had been subjected to corporal punishment. Fiona was uprooted often as a child and had been subjected to corporal punishment. Ashley and Lynn had been enrolled in day-care. Sue had a male parent and Jane had siblings.


a) What can the psychiatrist conclude is the cause of the blurred ego boundaries of these women?


b) Construct a table that supports this conclusion.


c) Which of Mill鈥檚 methods did the psychiatrist use?|||Nothing in philosophy is independent of context. That is all philosophy is.


Aristotle developed the Correspondence Theory of Truth that states it is "a relational property involving a characteristic relation (to be specified) to some portion of reality (to be specified)." SEP http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-鈥?/a>


http://www.iep.utm.edu/truth/#H3





These "to-be-specified" relationships are the context.