Meaning and Scientific Status of Causality

C. G. Jung

Henry Margenau

The disagreement with regard to the validity of the principle of causality, existing to-day among scientists, has its roots in the diversity of definitions of the principle itself rather than in a problematic scientific situation. As far as the formulation of quantum theory is complete its bearing upon philosophical questions can be fixed with precision provided the questions are phrased intelligibly. But a question is intelligible from a scientific point of view only if it satisfies two conditions: (1) the meaning of its terms must be fixed; (2) it must be in accord with the conventions of the science to which the question is put.

Henry Mehlberg

Henry Mehlberg, Robert S. Cohen

John P. Losee

The assessment of causal status for quantum phenomena is complicated by a seeming lack of spatiotemporal continuity between putative cause events and effect events. In cases of causation-by-omission, there often is a conflict between the results of a "scientific" causal analysis and the results of causal analysis that invokes questions of responsibility or guilt. The effects of electromagnetic fields qualify as causal on a manipulability criterion. Although the two-slit experiment qualifies as a causal relation on the inferability criterion and the counterfactual dependence criterion, it is a noncausal relation on the spatiotemporal continuity criterion. So do the effects realized in the two-slit experiment. Observations of electrons at slit A is an intervention that alters the behavior of electrons passing unobserved through slit B. The pattern on the screen changes from an interference pattern to a juxtaposition pattern as a result of the intervention. The instantaneous transfer of energy over a distance violates a basic principle of the theory of relativity.

小川, 悠斗

This paper proposes a unified theoretical framework that redefines the foundations of scientific inquiry, technological development, and civilizational structure through the lens of future causality. Conventional civilization has been governed by two paradigms:(1) Classical causality, in which the past determines the present, and(2) Quantum causality, in which observation determines physical states.Both paradigms ultimately rely on present-based determinacy and therefore exhibit structural limitations in explaining generation, creativity, and the emergence of meaning. To address these limitations, this study introduces the concept of the future-causal civilization, in which the future acts as the primary source of determination. Using the Future Convergence Theory (FCT), the paper formalizes the future-causal operator Λ(T) and establishes meaning-density tensors as the foundational structures governing physical, informational, and cognitive processes. In this framework, convergence replaces probabilistic uncertainty, and future-fixed points replace observation-dependent state formation. Building on this theoretical foundation, the paper defines the Λ-System as the practical implementation architecture of future-causal dynamics. The Λ-System reconfigures artificial intelligence, scientific reasoning, social governance, and creativity by enabling systems to operate through future-fixed-point constraints rather than historical data or observational collapse. This establishes a non-continuous transition from quantum-based technologies to future-causal structures. The findings demonstrate that future causality is not a speculative metaphysical concept but a coherent structural principle capable of reorganizing scientific methodology, ethical norms, technological design, and civilizational development. The paper concludes by outlining research directions for formalizing Λ-System protocols, measuring meaning-density fields, and constructing operational models for future-causal societies. Prior PublicationThis paper was archived and published in advance on Arweave. https://arweave.net/822cGwua3RBfC6uoYrlB2JIAgYkVqu1lSid9vrz7Qmc https://arweave.net/sUOWqy-C4N4PHQrjutIg80-7pblAG1tzOUUglIO5ZaE