>>10838921I think we are having a communication problem in this thread. I would only use the word equal to mean "the same thing in all cases" in the way you are doing here so the question feels wrong already by default.
But if you mean to ask when something that looks like correlation is one instance of a causation. I would forego
>>10839100for reasons mentioned below.
The schoolbook example would be wet streets and rain. If it rains on a street, that rain causes the street to be wet. The defining difference from a causation is that this always happens in sequence / as a chain of causality.
>>10839100I feel that is rather unspecific of an example, even though it seems plausibly valid. What would you call overeating, and which weight gain is significant here?
If you say that over-eating always causes weight-gain, then that is a stated causation, or an implication because it is a case of "if A true, then B must be true".
If you say that over-eating mostly/usually causes weight-gain, then you are also saying that you can overeat and not gain weight. In that case, you have a case of incomplete causation at best. Both are correlation just by merit of one thing being observed when the other occurs.
