{"id":533,"date":"2016-06-24T23:30:09","date_gmt":"2016-06-25T03:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/aristotle2digital.blogwyrm.com\/?p=533"},"modified":"2016-06-24T10:48:57","modified_gmt":"2016-06-24T14:48:57","slug":"milling-about","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aristotle2digital.blogwyrm.com\/?p=533","title":{"rendered":"Milling About"},"content":{"rendered":"

Arguing about cause and effect is a difficult enterprise even in the best of circumstances.\u00a0 Rarely is it as clean, or as boring, as introductory texts on logic make it out to be.\u00a0 Examples of simple cause and effect \u2013 it is raining and therefore the ground is getting wet \u2013 are neither controversial nor are they fun.\u00a0 Most everyone agrees on the matter and that\u2019s that.\u00a0 But arguments over new things undiscovered or unseen are one of the best things going.\u00a0 Who isn\u2019t thrilled by the prospect of figuring something out that none else have done?<\/p>\n

Interestingly enough, almost all of us use standard methods for arguing from effect to cause.\u00a0 Most likely, we\u2019ve all learned these methods by first watching others apply them and then by next jumping into the game and trying out the methods ourselves.\u00a0 As will be discussed in more detail below, these methods worm themselves into almost every aspect of life; often without our notice.\u00a0 They form the backbone of most editorials, advertisements, and dinner-table arguments.\u00a0 And despite their anonymity, they do have a name:\u00a0 Mill\u2019s Methods<\/a>.<\/p>\n

First codified by John Stuart Mill in his book A System of Logic<\/em> (1843), these methods, which no doubt date back to antiquity, go by the obscure names of:<\/p>\n