Be aware: On this piece I take advantage of the time period ‘vaccine’ instead of ‘untested chemical intervention meant to (a) line the pockets of the pharmaceutical trade and (b) rubber-stamp the management mechanisms launched within the UK in 2020’.
THE shills for the pharmaceutical trade deny that sudden deaths within the absolutely vaccinated add as much as any greater than a group of unconnected tragedies. That lots of the fallen are younger, match, and wholesome is inadequate in evidential pressure to bend their collective thoughts in the direction of the chance that there may very well be a causal connection between the demise and the jab. To the extent that they’re ready to sieve the proof, they’re sceptical that the vaccination could be the widespread issue which explains the ‘unexplained’ deadly accidents.
The virus of cognitive dissonance has unfold Omicron-like via the group of vaccine cultists.
As Kathy Gyngell identified on the Mark Steyn Present the opposite night, an ordinary manoeuvre on this whirlwind of denial is the tiresome insistence that ‘correlation just isn’t causation’. Kathy was fairly proper to name this out. The technique is based on a class error.
The try to separate correlation and causation is logically unsustainable. Correlation is a crucial situation of causation and is due to this fact at all times proof of it. And there’s a respectable custom of empiricist thought which argues that causation simply is a systemised sample of correlation.
The 18th century thinker and man of letters David Hume is probably the most distinguished consultant of this custom. Hume prompt that there is no such thing as a extra to causation than ‘contiguity and succession’. In different phrases, correlation between occasions which at all times appear to happen one after the opposite. That’s it. In the case of causal relationships, he argued, what extra is there to say?
Whether or not deaths, and certainly harm, following vaccination meet this evidential threshold is moot, I suppose. However to scale back a declare of causation to certainly one of ‘mere’ correlation is to miss a sturdy Enlightenment worldview, one formed by minds much more penetrating than that of your common (and they’re very common) member of Sage.
On the threat of arguing towards myself (which isn’t at all times a foul factor) this can be a worldview I don’t share. I take into account it to be mechanistic and reductive, and it’s value declaring that it’s traditionally latest. There’s another, Aristotelian, conception of the universe which sees it not as a system of mechanistic interactions, however as being rinsed in objective. Aristotle had a textured account of how change is feasible and recognized ‘causation’ not as a unitary phenomenon however as involving 4 distinct components. Solely certainly one of these, the ‘remaining trigger’, approximates to something we would ordinarily recognise at the moment.
Aristotle developed this conception in c400BC, however reality just isn’t time-stamped and this teleological, non-mechanistic metaphysic has a contemporary iteration within the philosophy of science. Once more, disseminated by philosophers extra fleet-of-mind than your common Institution scientist.
It’s additionally value declaring, by the way in which, that Aristotle was much more scientist than thinker. And that whereas his instructor, Plato, would have written the perfect automobile upkeep guide, Aristotle would have been tinkering beneath the bonnet. The purpose is that each the Humean and Aristotelian analyses of causation – whereas incommensurable – every affirm an intimacy between (systematic) correlation and causation, and every deny any viable metaphysical separation.
Why am I risking (one other) cameo in Pseuds Nook?
Since March 2020 the Sage Sanhedrin and their authorities puppets have dictated the phrases of reference of the lockdown and vaccination debate and have ensured – intentionally or not – that the parameters of allowable dialogue represent a number-count evaluation of the rhythms of human life. This method was authored by soulless sorts who assumed that the world is a system of mechanisms. How these mechanisms work together is of utmost significance to them; whence they originate is a matter worthy solely of indifference.
The Whittys and Vallances of this world can learn the notes on the web page however can’t hear the music of their heads, not to mention their hearts. And, as I’ve prompt, their ploy when confronted with overwhelming proof of vaccine-related harm – to enchantment to an unsustainable distinction between correlation and causation – is philosophically and traditionally ignorant. There isn’t any respectable faculty of thought which permits it. When the correlation turns into more and more salient there comes some extent at which a causal assertion is being made.
For the final two and a half years the Institution pseudoscientists have been making an attempt to empty lifetime of its complexity and exchange it with numbers on a graph. They’ve insisted we play draughts when life is absolutely chess. It’s important, for the sake of the injured and useless, that we show the true connection between vaccine and harm, that to a sure extent we play their sport.
However let’s at all times keep in mind that the fallacious correlation/causation ‘distinction’ can by no means be the premise for his or her counterargument. That it isn’t a weapon which is accessible to them.
One remaining level: we’d like additionally to be clear that regardless of the variety of vaccine injured, the evil of coercive vaccination was additionally inflicted on those that got here via unscathed, who have been duped into surrendering their capability for knowledgeable consent. The evil was intrinsic to the method.
