In terms of the concept of an energetic causal route, Hitchcock talks of actual or token causation on the following words:
(10) If c and e are distinct actual events and X and Z are binary variables whose values represent the occurrence and non-occurrence of these events, then c is a cause of e if and only if there is an active causal route from X to Z in an appropriate causal model
Lewis resorts to quasi-dependency due to the fact shattering of container (e) does not counterfactually trust Suzys throw (c), thanks to what can has happened got she perhaps not thrown (viz, Billys stone would have shattered the new bottles as an alternative)
As mentioned, (10) does not handle cases of symmetrical overdetermination since the when Suzy and you can Billy each other throw the stones individually, per place is enough on bottle to break, and you may both rocks smack the bottle therefore none throw preempts brand new other, once the neither throw is on an energetic station as the laid out when you look at the (9). To deal with such as for instance cases, Hitchcock weakens (10) of the replacing the fresh new ‘energetic channel during the (10) to the notion of an effective weakly energetic channel (2001: 290). The quintessential tip here that there’s a beneficial weakly effective route between X and you will Z merely whenever Z counterfactually relies on X according to the cold of some possible, not at all times genuine, values of details which are not on channel away from X so you can Z. Naturally, to recover counterfactual dependence anywhere between Suzys throw while the smashing i keep fixed BT = 0: had Suzy perhaps not tossed about model in which Billy doesnt put, the new package have no smashed. Also to own Billys put.
The fundamental strategy deployed here to manage one another preemption and symmetrical overdetermination carries a glaring resemblance to Lewiss quasi-dependence choice to the newest later preemption disease. e quasi-utilizes c, yet not, because one inside the a possible globe to the exact same statutes where in actuality the intrinsic reputation of your own techniques regarding c so you’re able to age is similar but Billy doesnt toss, there is the expected counterfactual dependence. ‘Cold parameters that aren’t inherent towards the c-age process during the their genuine values (when you look at the later preemption times) age.g. freezing BH within 0 converts about a similar trick. The latest key differences is that Lewiss services comes to attractive to brand new details out-of a completely ordinary counterfactual (“In the event the Suzy hadn’t thrown, …”) within a possible 
world in which certain actual events (elizabeth.grams. Billys hit) never occur, due to the fact architectural-equations provider concerns popular with the truth out of good counterfactual which have an alternate sort of antecedent (“Had Suzy maybe not tossed and you may Billys material still not hit, …”). Hitchcock calls these ‘explicitly nonforetracking (ENF) counterfactuals. (Similarly for shaped overdetermination, in which we ‘freeze BT within 0 now a low-actual worthy of to recuperate counterfactual reliance ranging from Suzys put while the smashing.)
5.dos SEF and you will Counterfactuals
Whoever has pursued the fresh new SEF method to getting an analysis regarding ‘genuine causation which is, the new causal relation ranging from genuine, sort of incidents had hardly any to express concerning semantics of one’s counterfactuals you to definitely underpin SEF. Specific article writers (e.g. Hitchcock 2001) explicitly and lots of people implicitly assume a generally Lewisian method of counterfactuals, and so the structural equations is actually representations regarding connections off products on the counterfactual dependence as the explained a lot more than whoever information standards try generally Lewisian.