causationist

causationist

(kɔːˈzeɪʃənɪst)
n
a person who believes in the theory of universal causation
References in periodicals archive ?
This moves away from assuming that academic analysis requires heuristics that fall easily into causationist or unified theory of everything frameworks
In particular, he evaluates the competing perspectives of the "causationist" approach, which requires a direct causal link between the expression it purports to regulate and the harm it allegedly causes, and the "correlationist" approach, which would regulate hate expression based on a rational correlation between the expression and the harm.
A direct link imposes upon the regulator the burden of demonstrating the existence of "a clear and present danger" or an "imminent lawless action", to borrow from American legal terminology, (4) as a consequence of the expression it purports to regulate (the "causationist" approach).
While the causationist approach is based on a curative logic of imputation, the correlationist approach is inspired by a preventive logic of risk management.
This causationist approach stands in contrast to the correlationist approach.
For example, aside from the fact that a direct prohibition of hate propaganda would contradict a basic tenet of the First Amendment creed, that is, viewpoint neutrality, the causationist approach adopted by American law in its analysis of speech-related harms precludes the United States from fully subscribing to these international norms, and as a result, from participating in their enforcement.
For example, reflection on a legal norm's layers of effectivity may push some to rethink their adherence to a causationist approach for assessing the constitutionality of that norm.
In particular, he evaluates file competing perspectives of the "causationist" approach, which requires a direct causal link between die expression it purports to regulate and the harm it allegedly causes, and die "correlationist" approach, which would regulate hate expression based on a rational correlation between die expression and file harm.
A direct link imposes upon the regulator the burden of demonstrating the existence of "a clear and present danger" or an "imminent lawless action", to borrow from American legal terminology, as a consequence of the expression it purports to regulate (the "causationist" approach).
For example, aside from the fact that a direct prohibition of hate propaganda would contradict a basic tenet of the First Amendment creed, that is, viewpoint neutrality, the causationist approach adopted by American law in its analyis of speech-related harms precludes the United States from fully subscribing to these international norms, and as a result, from participating in their enforcement.