Essay: Anti reductionism-cases
It can be deduced that sorceress Morgana wants to turn the queen into a frog using her single spell, while sorcerer Merlin using his single spell, purpose to turn the king into a frog. Therefore, it can be assumed that the two working, their spells work directly not through intermediate events. The case can be said to be straightforward, because prince and the king turned to frogs and not the queen and the prince, thus, Merlin’s spell seem to be effective. While on the other hand, Morgana’s spell can be said to increase the probability that the prince meets the frog fate. Just like the card game, the players one to four picking or getting the ace increases the probability of the last player zero chances of getting the ace.
It follows, that the cases seriously challenge the possibility of analyzing causation. For instance, in a magical spell case, it can be said it was Merlin’s spell that was effective and not Morgana’s. While in the card game, it can be easily be easily be deduced that the first four player’s probability of picking the ace is effective to have the fifth player missing it out. These cases demonstrate that it is hopeful for persons that need to reduce causation that there might be some underlying truth-maker for the causal facts. For this, overlapping cases they offers no hope at all, since there are no non-causal facts that determine whether the cause is the really cause.
 Ibid, p. 42