Causal reactive chains cannot explain why events occur one way rather than another.

Evidence

Furthermore, the sequence argument raises some conceptual questions. First of all, sequences seem simply to occur. In contrast to processes explained by the regime of selfreinforcing mechanisms, the concept of causal reactive chains does not provide a logic that explains why the sequences take place this way and not in another way. Why do reactive sequences accumulate? Superimposing, ex post, a trajectory on reactive sequences does not provide an explanation. Another problem is generalization. A theory of path dependence aims at explaining a particular class of processes (Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001). Drawing on reactive sequences does not, however, transcend a singular case: singular reasons are supposed to explain singular events only. — Jörg Sydow, Georg Schreyögg, and Jochen Koch, Organizational Path Dependence, 71

Categorization

• QUESTION: The core challenge stands unanswered here — what mechanism, if not reactive chains, would explain why sequences accumulate in one direction rather than another?
• XREF: Echoes the nomothetic-versus-idiographic divide and the problem of generalizing from singular cases in historical sociology.