The basic structure of subjective causality

                   The basic structure of Subjective Causality - 

Whenever we are asked a reason for a phenomenon, we “scan” through the subjective issue and hit at one or two prime reason(s).

Then comes the question of explaining how it is the reason. 

For that, there are 2 chains emanating from this reason - one ‘effects-chain’ and one ‘causes-chain’. 

The effects-chain asks for effects i.e. the question - ‘so what happens with that?’ to the reason, and the causes-chain asks for the causes i.e. the question - ‘Why?’ to the reason. Both lead to an end point and provide an explanation as to how the reason is effectively one for the given phenomenon. (Examples will make all this clear).

The effects-chain is commonsensical; the causes-chain, on the contrary, requires specific domain knowledge.

Examples - 

1. Why is the US the most prosperous country in the world?

Here one is asking for a reason to a subjective phenomenon.

Here, one scans through the subjective issue and arrives most probably at - it has the best talent in the world. This is the reason.

Now the ‘effects-chain’ from this, to provide an explanation as to how (by asking the question - ‘so what happens with that?’) is obvious - commonsensical. How having the best talent leads to the country being prosperous is straightforward, and doesn't require literally stating the steps.

Now the ‘causes-chain’ from the reason to provide an explanation as to how (by asking the question - ‘why?’) (why does the US have the best talent?) requires a bit of specific domain knowledge, which in this case is - open door policy. The open door policy is one of the steps in the chain explaining why the US has the best talent, in connection with the given broader phenomenon of the US being the most prosperous country in the world.

2. What makes Sachin Tendulkar such a great batsman?

 Here, there are 2 reasons - talent and sheer hard-work. 

The first reason - talent : How being talented leads to being a great batsman is commonsense. Why he is talented requires a bit of domain knowledge - heredity/in-born excellent hand-eye coordination skills/flexible arms/...etc. 

The second reason - hard-work : How hard-work leads to being a great batsman is commonsense. Why he is hard-working requires specific domain knowledge, like his coach’s early influence.