On 01-05-98 William Elliot wrote to John Boone... 
 
        Hello William and thanks for writing, 
  
 WE>  JB> of "post hoc ergo procter hoc" reasoning.  
 
 WE> After this, therefore on account of this. 
 
 WE> So by using this principle, since your statement is after my 
 WE> quoted statement, your statement is caused by my statement. 
   
  Actually, it wasNOT your "statement" is was the "hidden" 
meaning behind the statement . 
  
 WE> There's seems to be a lot to say about this principle.  Note how my 
 
  Yep, IMO "post hoc" is the -essential- (but not -sufficient-) 
component of causation (Mill's Method gives some glimpses into 
causation).  Said logically, if A causes B, then A preceeds B; 
however, it is illogical to say, if A preceeds B, then A causes B.  
  
 WE> second 
 WE> and third statements are after your statement and they are  
 WE> caused by your statement.  That's two in a row already!  I  
 WE> think you've discovered a new paradigm.  Continuing this  
 WE> thread could give us additional evidence. -) 
   
  Well, "post hoc" to the third or perhaps fourth . 
 
Take care, 
John 
 
___ 
 * OFFLINE 1.54 
--- Maximus 3.01
---------------