The phrase "a causal fact" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing a fact that establishes a cause-and-effect relationship between two or more events or phenomena.
Example: "The study provided evidence that a causal fact exists between smoking and lung cancer."
Alternatives: "a cause-and-effect fact" or "a fact of causation".
If formaldehyde is in fact a causal factor for leukemia, one would expect leukemia risk to increase with formaldehyde exposure both within and among studies.
Instead, the idea is that certain causal facts non-causally determine the facts about what words refer to.
These findings have fueled the concept that endothelial surface layer disruption may in fact be a causal factor promoting atherogenesis [2].
For instance, if a model M is used in which this interaction comes out as non-causal, one might well infer, not that the interaction is not causal relative to M, but rather that M itself is a poor model of the real, model-independent causal facts.
In order to be able to do so, one needs principles relating causal facts and probabilistic facts.
Kripke's claim isn't that causal facts themselves cause our words to refer to what they do.
These substitute immanents serve as pushers, and relate to the causal facts, while still being distinct from them.
According to an interventionist/manipulationist account of causation, it is the system that gets such counterfactuals right that correctly represents the causal facts.
Even if two inquirers agree on the causal facts, they may still disagree about their meaning because they relate the facts in different ways, reflecting their background values.
If these theorists are right, then the zombie hypothesis is not apriori coherent after all, for the microphysical facts captured by 'P' will fix all of the causal facts relevant to the truth of 'Q'.
