Abstracta Are Causal

Abstract

Many philosophers think all abstract objects are causally inert. Here, focusing on novels, I argue that some abstracta are causally efficacious. First, I defend a straightforward argument for this view. Second, I outline an account of object causation—an account of how objects (as opposed to events) cause effects. This account further supports the view that some abstracta are causally efficacious.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    I offer no account here of what makes abstract objects abstract. Although I assume that abstract objects have no spatial location, there are issues with positing this as a full account of abstractness. For instance, mental objects (and God according to some theists) are neither abstract nor spatially located.

  2. 2.

    See, for instance, Bach (1987: 12), Balaguer (2001: 1), Dodd (2000: 431), Dummett (1973: 493), Friedman (2005: 288), van Inwagen (2007: 200), Juvshik (2018), Linsky and Zalta (1995: 252), and Parsons (2008: 1). Note that Dodd (2007) changed his mind and argued that some abstracta are causal.

  3. 3.

    See, for instance, Thomasson (1999) and Salmon (1998) for defenses of fictional characters being abstract artifacts, Kaplan (1990) for a defense of words being such, Levinson (1980) and Evnine (2007) for a defense of musical works being such, and Cole (2004) for a defense of corporations being such. See, for instance, Dodd (2000) and Kivy (1987) for defenses of the view that musical works are discovered rather than created.

  4. 4.

    More precisely, Cresswell thinks propositions are causal in some sense but non-causal in another sense.

  5. 5.

    Maddy no longer endorses this view of sets. See, for instance, Maddy (2007), especially Part IV.

  6. 6.

    Dodd and I agree also that objects are causal in virtue of events being causal. Dodd (2007: 13-14) discusses this view. I employ this view in Section 5.

  7. 7.

    For rhetorical purposes I am talking as if events are not objects.

  8. 8.

    Fair (1979) offers a seminal defense of this view.

  9. 9.

    Brock, Maslen, and Ngai (2013: 76) offer very similar criticisms to those I have offered here. See Callard (2007) for further criticisms. See, for instance, Dowe (2004) and Beebee (2004) for criticisms of causation by disconnection and causal omissions.

  10. 10.

    Granted, some interpretations of quantum mechanics (and alternatives to quantum mechanics) are, at least arguably, consistent with there being no causation at a distance. See, for instance, Price (1996) for related discussion of many-worlds interpretations, many-minds interpretations, and retrocausal interpretations. Proponents of the energy transfer view may insist we eschew interpretations that include causation at a distance. This raises methodological questions about whether a metaphysical theory of causation should influence how we interpret quantum mechanics.

  11. 11.

    Alternatively, one could argue that these cases do not genuinely involve causal overdetermination. See Thomasson (2007), especially Chapter 1, for related discussion.

  12. 12.

    Juvshik himself is likely not an error theorist. He is ostensibly more sympathetic to the paraphrasing strategy considered in Section 4.

  13. 13.

    One might think the culprit in (1b) is the plural pronoun ‘them’, given that its antecedent, ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’, is a singular term. But it will not help to replace ‘them’ with a singular pronoun that purportedly denotes anything other than the novel. For instance, ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin caused many Americans to support abolition; much of it (=the total collection of copies of Uncle Tom’s Cabin) has been lost’ is infelicitous, even though the anaphoric pronoun purportedly denotes a single object (the collection of copies of the novel).

  14. 14.

    See Burgess and Rosen (1997: 23-25), Caplan and Matheson (2004: 118-121), and Rosen (2017) for discussion about why it is hard to give an account of object causation that allows for concreta, but not abstracta, to be causal. These texts inspired this section of the paper.

  15. 15.

    Recall that when I talk of objects causing an effect, this is consistent with them being merely partial causes.

  16. 16.

    I assume all causal explanations are true. This is purely terminological.

References

  1. Bach, K. (1987). Thought and reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Balaguer, M. (2001). Platonism and anti-Platonism in mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beebee, H. (2004). Causing and nothingness. In J. Collins, N. Hall, & L. Paul (Eds.), Causation and counterfactuals (pp. 291–308). MIT Press.

  4. Benacerraf, P. (1973). Mathematical truth. Journal of Philosophy, 70, 661–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brock, S., Maslen, C., & Ngai, J. (2013). A puzzle about fictional characters. In Fictionalism to Realism: Fictional and Other Social Entities, Carola Barbero, Maurizio Ferraris, and Alberto Voltolini (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burgess, J. P., & Rosen, G. (1997). A subject with no object: Strategies for Nominalistic interpretation of mathematics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Callard, B. (2007). The conceivability of Platonism. Philosophia Mathematica, 15(3), 347–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Caplan, B., & Matheson, C. (2004). Can a musical work be created. British Journal of Aesthetics, 44(2), 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cole, J. (2004). An abstract status function account of corporations. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 44(1), 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cresswell, M. (2010). Abstract entities in the causal order. Theoria, 76, 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dodd, J. (2000). Musical works as eternal types. British Journal of Aesthetics, 40(4), 424–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dodd, J. (2007). Works of music: An essay in ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Douglass, F. (2003). The life and times of Frederick Douglass. Dover Publications.

  14. Dowe, P. (2004). Causes are physically connected to their effects: Why preventers and omissions are not causes. In C. Hitchcock (Ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science, chapter 9, Blackwell (p. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dummett, M. A. E. (1973). Frege: Philosophy of language. Harper & Row.

  16. Evnine, S. (2009). Constitution and qua objects in the ontology of music. British Journal of Aesthetics, 49(3), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fair, D. (1979). Causation and the flow of energy. Erkenntnis, 14, 219–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Friedman, J. (2005). Modal Platonism, an easy way to avoid ontological commitment to abstract Entitites. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 34(4), 227–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Juvshik, T. (2018). Abstract objects, causal efficacy, and causal exclusion. Erkenntnis, 83, 805–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaplan, D. (1990). Words. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, 64(1), 93–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim, J. (1993). Supervenience and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kivy, P. (1987). Platonism in music: Another kind of defense. American Philosophical Quarterly, 24(3), 233–244.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Levinson, J. (1980). What a musical work is. Journal of Philosophy, 70(1), 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lin, M. (2017). Time, causation, and abstract objects. Unpublished Manuscript.

  25. Linsky, B., & Zalta, E. (1995). Naturalized Platonism versus Platonized naturalism. The Journal of Philosophy., 92(10), 525–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Maddy, P. (1990). Realism in mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Maddy, P. (2007). Second philosophy: A naturalistic method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Merricks, T. (2001). Objects and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Parsons, C. (2008). Mathematical thoughts and its object. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Price, H. (1996). Time’s arrow and Archimedes’ point: New directions for the physics of time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rosen, Gideon. (2017). “Abstract objects.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/abstract-objects/>.

  32. Schaffer, J. (2000). Causation by disconnection. Philosophy of Science, 67(2), 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sider, T. (2003). What’s so bad about Overdetermination? Philosophy and Phenomenology Research., 67, 719–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomasson, A. (1999). Fiction and metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thomasson, A. (2007). Ordinary objects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. van Inwagen, P. (2007). “A materialist ontology of the human person”. Persons: Human and Divine (van Inwagen, Zimmerman, eds.) (pp. 199–215). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

For helpful comments and discussion, thanks to Mark Balaguer, James Van Cleve, Sam Cumming, Katrina Elliott, Ashley Feinsinger, Deborah Friedell, Pamela Hieronymi, Andrew Jewell, Tim Juvshik, Dominic Lopes, Michaela McSweeney, Eliot Michaelson, Margaret Moore, Terence Parsons, Jessica Pepp, Gabe Rabin, Katherine Ritchie, Sheldon Smith, John Woods, Michel-Antoine Xhignesse, and audiences at the University of British Columbia, Temple University, Occidental College, and the Central European University Summer School in Ontology and Metaontology.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Friedell.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Friedell, D. Abstracta Are Causal. Philosophia 48, 133–142 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-019-00073-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Abstract objects
  • Causation
  • Object causation
  • Novels
  • Dodd