The refutation of counterfactual and conditional approaches to causation

This article is concerned with applicability of the two models of causation - counterfactual and conditional, within a framework defined by stipulated causal relationship in which the cause can include several alternative sets of atomic events. In the form of a thought experiment, it was examined if two models of causation succeeded to reconstruct a stipulated reality. Logical and empirical analysis showed that both models failed, pointing out to their inherent weaknesses under selected conditions. The analysis also showed logical nonequivalence between reconstructed and stipulated causations, discovering deeper logical apart form the weaknesses in applicability of two models. It was also demonstrated that real-life examples in which alternative sets of antecedents act as causes are not rare, with reference to the Le Chatelier's principle in chemistry, which provides a framework for identification of whole series of similar causal situations.