0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How do correlation and causation differ?
Correlation is when two things are related or have similar properties and they can exist independently. Causation means that one thing made the other thing happen.
Is it true that two dependent events can have the same probability of occurring?
Yes, it is possible for two dependent events to have the same probability of occurring. The probability of an event is dependent on the outcomes of other events, and it is influenced by the relationship between these events. So, it is conceivable for two dependent events to have equal probabilities.
Events 2 has a causal relationship with Event 1 when?
Event 1 makes Event 2 happen.
What events are such that the occurrence of one does not change the probability of other events?
Independent events.
How do you find the probability of disjoint events?
Multiply the possible outcomes of the events in the disjoint events
What term do historians use when they discuss the relationship between to events in which one is the direct result of another?
Causation
How is historical causation similar to correlation?
Historical causation and correlation both involve relationships between events or variables. However, causation implies a direct relationship where one event causes another, while correlation suggests a statistical relationship where changes in one event may be associated with changes in another, without implying causation. Both concepts are used to interpret patterns in data or events.
Causation describes a relationship between two events in which?
Answer this question… one event directly triggers the other.
What term do historians use when they discuss the relationship between two events in which one is the direct result of another?
Causation
Two events have a relationship of correlation rather than causation if they?
occurred at the same time but did not influence each other.
How do historians define the term causation?
The relationship between two events in which one leads directly to the other occurring
What would lead a historian to consider two events to have a relationship of correlation rather than causation?
If the events happened around the same time but one did not cause the other
What is a cause and effect inference?
A cause and effect inference is a conclusion drawn about the relationship between two events or variables, where one is believed to have caused the other. It involves identifying a potential cause and its effect based on observed patterns or data. However, it is important to note that correlation does not always imply causation, and further analysis is often needed to establish a causal relationship.
How do correlation and causation differ?
Correlation is when two things are related or have similar properties and they can exist independently. Causation means that one thing made the other thing happen.
What is the philosophy of causation?
The philosophy of causation examines the relationship between causes and effects. It explores questions about how events are connected and if causation is deterministic or probabilistic. Philosophers also consider issues such as whether causation is a fundamental feature of reality or simply a useful way to understand the world.
How are correlation and causation similar?
both have connections between multiple events
What fallacy is described assuming there is no correlation between two events there is also a casual relationship?
Very few people will assume, given NO correlation, that there is also a casual relationship.I will assume that you meant the fallacy in assuming that if "there is no correlation between two events there is also nocausal relationship".Correlation is a measure of linear relationship. If there is a non-linear relationship it is possible for the correlation to be low. Or, in the extreme case of a relationship that is symmetric about a specific value of the explanatory variable, for the correlation to be zero.Very few people will assume, given NO correlation, that there is also a casual relationship.I will assume that you meant the fallacy in assuming that if "there is no correlation between two events there is also nocausal relationship".Correlation is a measure of linear relationship. If there is a non-linear relationship it is possible for the correlation to be low. Or, in the extreme case of a relationship that is symmetric about a specific value of the explanatory variable, for the correlation to be zero.Very few people will assume, given NO correlation, that there is also a casual relationship.I will assume that you meant the fallacy in assuming that if "there is no correlation between two events there is also nocausal relationship".Correlation is a measure of linear relationship. If there is a non-linear relationship it is possible for the correlation to be low. Or, in the extreme case of a relationship that is symmetric about a specific value of the explanatory variable, for the correlation to be zero.Very few people will assume, given NO correlation, that there is also a casual relationship.I will assume that you meant the fallacy in assuming that if "there is no correlation between two events there is also nocausal relationship".Correlation is a measure of linear relationship. If there is a non-linear relationship it is possible for the correlation to be low. Or, in the extreme case of a relationship that is symmetric about a specific value of the explanatory variable, for the correlation to be zero.
