Evidence
Evidence
It is all very well theorizing that there are three types of causation that are linked to the philosophic positions on free will, but is there evidence that they actually relate to reality?
Event-Event Causation
There is plenty of evidence of event-event causation. Indeed the "laws of physics" would be incoherent if the universe did not behave, on a macro scale, in a determinate manner. So although this does not prove that event-event causation is ontologically real, it is a strong indication. It underlies scientific realism, which is the view that the universe exists outside our perception of it, and that the "laws of physics" describe that reality.
Random Chance
There are plenty of examples, like the roll of dice, which are thought to be random, but it is questionable whether they are truly so. The reason is that determinate systems can give unpredictable results if all the variables are not known. Hence if all the variables were known for a particular roll of dice, the outcome could, in theory, be predicted.
Also, it is possible to define statistical rules as to how truly random systems behave, but it is known that pseudo-random (determinate) systems can emulate such behaviour. So the evidence that a system may behave statistically in a random manner is not conclusive.
Perhaps the case for random chance being real rests on the way that the universe behaves at the atomic scale. Quantum Mechanics suggests that if a single unstable atom is placed in a controlled environment, it cannot be predicted how long it will take for the atom to decay. Only the probability of decay within a given time can be calculated. However, the mere fact that the probability can be calculated suggests that, in a probabilistic sense, the process is determinate.
Agent Causation
The evidence for (and against) agent causation is considered under free will...
