It seems to me that this is the primary thing that we should be working on. If probability is subjective, and causality reduces to probability, then isn’t causality subjective, i.e., a function of background knowledge?
Causality is a useful tool in the map, to describe the territory. The Territory just is. It doesn’t have causality, laws of physics or anything else. Those are just the best tools we have to form accurate maps of it.
It seems to me that this is the primary thing that we should be working on. If probability is subjective, and causality reduces to probability, then isn’t causality subjective, i.e., a function of background knowledge?
This seems not in the least contentious, if you’re talking about the map of causality.
The question is whether causality exists in the territory at all.
Causality is a useful tool in the map, to describe the territory. The Territory just is. It doesn’t have causality, laws of physics or anything else. Those are just the best tools we have to form accurate maps of it.
How do you know that?