Reply to Nathan: How to reconstruct the causal argument

Nicholas Nathan tries to resist the current version of the causal argument for sense-data in two ways. First he suggests that, on what he considers to be the correct re-construction of the argument, it equivocates on the sense of proximate cause. Second he defends a form of disjunctivism, by claiming that there might be an extra mechanism involved in producing veridical hallucination, that is not present in perception. I argue that Nathan’s reconstruction of the argument is not the appropriate one, and that, properly interpreted, the argument does not equivocate on proximate cause. Furthermore, I claim that his postulation of a modified mechanism for hallucinations is implausibly ad hoc.     

Pit your wits against young minds!

This column is a place for those bits of contagious mathematics that travel from person to person in the community, because they are so elegant, suprising, or appealing that one has an urge to pass them on. Contributions are most welcome.     

Cylindrical spike model for the formation of diamondlike thin films by ion deposition

T /n_S of n_T rearrangements and n_S atoms in the spike volume as the crucial parameter characterizing the ability of a given ion–target combination to achieve complete rearrangement of the spike volume. n_T/n_S>1 is the optimum condition for diamondlike film growth. For aC films the ion energy dependence of n_T/n_S agrees well with the measured sp³ bond fraction. For Ar⁺-ion-assisted deposition of aC we find n_T/n_S>1 above 50 eV with no pronounced ion energy dependence. Furthermore, our model predicts optimum conditions for the formation of cubic boron nitride between 50 eV and 3 keV. Accepted: 14 October 1997