[bachmeier]

I think the problem with your comment (and this is why it's necessary to post these qualifications any time Pearl comes up) is that you've bought into Pearl's claims about statistics. Statisticians have been studying causality for a long time.

All you need to do to verify that his claims about statisticians is BS is look at the potential outcomes framework, which was first developed in 1923: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubin_causal_model

He's well within his rights to argue that the PO framework has limitations and that his framework is superior. It's unethical for him to claim that statisticians are anti-causality or that they never studied it.

[bluefox]

You seem to read too much into my comment, and make it into something partisan. I'm not interested in that debate. My thoughts about statistics and probability were there before I read Pearl's book. Pearl mentions potential outcomes in his book.