Lecture to Participants of a Research Methodology Course, It draws on John Hicks and JL Mackie's work.

1. 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)

2. 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

3. 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
315 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

4. 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
415 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

5. 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.
15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 5

6. 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
615 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

7. 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
715 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

8. 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
815 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

9. 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.
15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 9

10. 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
1015 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

11. 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.
15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 11

12. 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)
1215 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

13. 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
1315 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences

14. 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
15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 14

15. 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
15 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences 15

16. 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.
1615 May 2016 Srijit Mishra, Causality in Social Sciences