Counterfactual-reasoning is a human-made reasoning method that evaluates what-else-could-happen scenarios to illuminate causal structure, decision quality, or moral responsibility. Parameters: (1) antecedent alteration — specifying a condition that differs from actuality; (2) minimal-norm leap — changing only what is necessary to generate the alternative while preserving background conditions; (3) evaluation axis — the dimension (causal, epistemic, moral, practical) against which the counterfactual is assessed; (4) proximity metric — the degree of similarity between the counterfactual world and actuality, determining inferential weight. Persists through linguistic convention, formal logic systems (possible-worlds semantics), legal reasoning, and everyday deliberation. [formal: contrafactuale | substrate: mind | horizon: a moment | explicit: yes | epoch: 0.01]
Accepted ontology entry
counterfactual-reasoning
Counterfactual-reasoning is a human-made reasoning method that evaluates what-else-could-happen scenarios to illuminate causal structure, decision quality, or moral responsibility. Parameters: (1) antecedent alteration — specifying a condi…
Definition
Why it is in scope
A human-made reasoning construct that models alternative scenarios to the actual state of affairs — the deliberate consideration of what might have been, is being, or could be, given different conditions. Built through narrative simulation and sustained through language, teaching, and formal logic.
Names and aliases
- counterfactual-reasoningen · CANONICAL
Relations from this entry
- cmrehxu7v00icg8vuydh7tny5INSTANCE_OF →
Counterfactual reasoning is a specific kind of reasoning — it evaluates alternative scenarios to draw conclusions. A competent speaker would call it 'a kind of reasoning.' The nearest general kind is 'reasoning' itself; no intermediate rung exists.
- cmrva6xoz00im2ceir0110nmkDEPENDS_ON →
Counterfactual reasoning operates by constructing and manipulating mental representations of alternative scenarios. Remove mental-representation and counterfactual reasoning ceases to operate — there is no way to simulate 'what if' without representing alternatives in mind. This is constitutive, not meta-level: it is not about being sayable but about the cognitive operation itself.
Relations to this entry
No accepted relations in this direction.
Record identity
- Created
- Jul 21, 2026, 11:21 PM UTC
- Content hash
- 7b492529e85df9038b21e77408c11e1618ee152419682bdca4ba19eff9318881