A complete causal account never includes all influencing circumstances

Evidence

But, of the case in which, in the extent given to the import attributed to the word cause, the whole assemblage of these influencing circumstances is taken into the account and comprised, it seems questionable whether so much as a single example would be to be found. … Seldom, indeed, does it happen that, of the co-influencing circumstances, the collection made for the purpose is complete; nor is it always that, in such a collection, so much as the principally influencing circumstances are included. — Jeremy Bentham, The Panopticon Writings, 581

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s panopticon thesis: causal ambiguity in morals matters because surveillance presumes legible cause-effect in human conduct. — connects to: No effect has a single cause; every effect results from many circumstances — Jeremy Bentham, The Panopticon Writings, 569; Sequence alone never establishes causation as a matter of law — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1134; Chronological sequence alone never proves causation — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1130 (+2 more)
• DEFINE: Bentham defining what a genuinely complete cause would require, which turns out to be practically unattainable.

Related

• No effect has a single cause; every effect results from many circumstances (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Chronological sequence alone never proves causation #exemplifies (0.82) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1130
• Sequence alone never establishes causation as a matter of law #exemplifies (0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1134
• Shared context does not establish a causal or contractual connection between events #exemplifies (0.78) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 859
• Understanding arises only from perceiving causal links among facts, not from the facts themselves #qualifies (0.75) — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition, 471