All causes are catalysts, do you agree?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kmarinas86
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the philosophical inquiry of whether every true cause of an event acts as a catalyst. Participants debate the necessity of an "activation potential" for events and memes to occur, questioning the determinacy and intelligibility of causes. Key points include the assertion that catalysts increase the probability of reactions and the notion that some events, like the moon rising, do not require an activation potential. The conversation concludes with a consensus on the relationship between causes and catalysts, emphasizing the importance of motives in understanding events.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of causal relationships in philosophy
  • Familiarity with the concept of activation potential
  • Basic knowledge of catalysts in scientific contexts
  • Awareness of meme theory and propagation
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the philosophical implications of causality in events
  • Research the concept of activation potential in both scientific and philosophical frameworks
  • Study the role of catalysts in chemical reactions and their metaphorical applications
  • Investigate meme theory and its relevance to social dynamics and communication
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, scientists, social theorists, and anyone interested in the interplay between causation, catalysts, and the propagation of ideas.

kmarinas86
Messages
974
Reaction score
1
Do you think every true cause of an event is the event's catalyst?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for any event which may occur to occur?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for a meme to propagate further?

If a given cause is never a catalyst, is the cause never determinate?

If the cause is never determinate, may it ever be intelligible?

If it can never be intelligible, can science study it?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I would say meaningless, meaningless, yes, meaningless (I think), no, no. I think the meaningless ones don't matter either way.
 
motives are the key here
 
I'm waiting for kmarinas to respond rather than writing a fat response.
 
Ok, do you want me to talk about your answers?
 
kmarinas86 said:
Do you think every true cause of an event is the event's catalyst?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for any event which may occur to occur?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for a meme to propagate further?

If a given cause is never a catalyst, is the cause never determinate?

If the cause is never determinate, may it ever be intelligible?

If it can never be intelligible, can science study it?

If catalysts increase the probability of a reaction occurring, why do they happen? If the definition of energy is the potential to do work, then why do things change if energy is another measure of probability? What causes things to change?
 
kmarinas86 said:
...Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for any event which may occur to occur?...
Suppose an event which may occur in the future = the moon will rise tomorrow. I find no "activation potential" to be crossed for this event to occur if it does occur, only the continued existence of the Earth and the moon.
 
regent said:
If catalysts increase the probability of a reaction occurring, why do they happen?

Probable cause.

regent said:
[W]hy do things change if energy is another measure of probability?

Um. Probability is not measured in joules, ergs, eV, or anything like that.

regent said:
What causes things to change?

Probable cause.

Rade said:
Suppose an event which may occur in the future = the moon will rise tomorrow. I find no "activation potential" to be crossed for this event to occur if it does occur, only the continued existence of the Earth and the moon.

The activation potential is not "to be" crossed. It already has done so long ago. There is no change in "activity" necessary for this to occur. There is no change in orbital "frequency" necessary for this to occur. The necessary activity and frequency have been present in the system, and no energy has to be added.
 
Kmarinas, I take it that when one asks a question, they should anticipate the answer. Therefore, I gave answers which might or might not be consistent with your anticipation. Now I wait for you to tell us what your anticipation was, and how my answers corresponded to your intuitions.
 
  • #10
verty said:
Kmarinas, I take it that when one asks a question, they should anticipate the answer. Therefore, I gave answers which might or might not be consistent with your anticipation. Now I wait for you to tell us what your anticipation was, and how my answers corresponded to your intuitions.

I has no idea as to what to ancipate.

kmarinas86 said:
Do you think every true cause of an event is the event's catalyst?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for any event which may occur to occur?

Do you think that some "activation potential" must be crossed for a meme to propagate further?

If a given cause is never a catalyst, is the cause never determinate?

If the cause is never determinate, may it ever be intelligible?

If it can never be intelligible, can science study it?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, no, no.
 
  • #11
Okay then, that settles it.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K