So his first decision is acausally linked to the whole of the slope, and to decide to take one step is to decide to go all the way.
(emphasis added)
No no no. His first decision is causally linked to the whole of the slope. If you draw out the DAG of causation, there’s an arrow going right from “became 95% Gandhi” to “became 90% Gandhi”, and an arrow going from “became 90% Gandhi” to “became 85% Gandhi”, and so on (with some intermediate nodes depending on resolution).
(emphasis added)
No no no. His first decision is causally linked to the whole of the slope. If you draw out the DAG of causation, there’s an arrow going right from “became 95% Gandhi” to “became 90% Gandhi”, and an arrow going from “became 90% Gandhi” to “became 85% Gandhi”, and so on (with some intermediate nodes depending on resolution).
I get the impression that “acausal” is an applause light here.
I think “acausal” (or logical) linkage was used as a generalization of “causal” linkage, as ‘dependences that TDT would take into account’.
Or possibly a typo.
I doubt that, given that he also said TDT instead of CDT, etc.
You are correct.