Morabia A
Clinical Epidemiology Unit, University Canton Hospital, Switzerland.
Epidemiology. 1991 Sep;2(5):367-9. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199109000-00010.
The rules to assess causation formulated by the eighteenth century Scottish philosopher David Hume are compared to Sir Austin Bradford Hill's causal criteria. The strength of the analogy between Hume's rules and Hill's causal criteria suggests that, irrespective of whether Hume's work was known to Hill or Hill's predecessors, Hume's thinking expresses a point of view still widely shared by contemporary epidemiologists. The lack of systematic experimental proof to causal inferences in epidemiology may explain the analogy of Hume's and Hill's, as opposed to Popper's, logic.
将18世纪苏格兰哲学家大卫·休谟制定的因果关系评估规则与奥斯汀·布拉德福德·希尔爵士的因果标准进行了比较。休谟的规则与希尔的因果标准之间类比的强度表明，无论希尔或其前辈是否知晓休谟的著作，休谟的思想表达了当代流行病学家仍广泛认同的一种观点。流行病学中因果推断缺乏系统性实验证据，这或许可以解释休谟和希尔（与波普尔的逻辑相对）逻辑之间的类比。
