Causality in machine learning
Causality has never been of much interest to me. I never understood why others make such a big deal out of it. Maybe it is a real thing, maybe illusion, definitely some kind of heuristic... but shouldn&#x27;t we be searching for useful &quot;laws&quot; (eg F ~ m1*m2&#x2F;r^2) rather than &quot;cause&quot;? I know some have denied causality a place in science:<p>&quot;In the following paper I wish, first, to maintain that the word &quot;cause&quot; is so inextricably bound up with misleading associations as to make its complete extrusion from the philosophical vocabulary desirable; secondly, to inquire what principle, if any, is employed in science in place of the supposed &quot;law of causality&quot; which philosophers imagine to be employed; thirdly, to exhibit certain confusions, especially in regard to teleology and determinism, which appear to me to be connected with erroneous notions as to causality.&quot;
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hist-analytic.com&#x2F;Russellcause.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hist-analytic.com&#x2F;Russellcause.pdf</a>