Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
Strictly speaking, causal relationships cannot be unequivocally proven when the researcher employs cross-sectional surveys that is, correlation is not causation.
Similar(59)
As mentioned previously, above results should not be interpreted as representative of causal relationships strictly speaking.
Strictly speaking, it is an event-causal theory and it consists of an event-causal theory of reason explanation and an event-causal theory of intentional action.
In a more popular view, Leibniz's place in the history of the philosophy of mind is best secured by his pre-established harmony, that is, roughly, by the thesis that there is no mind-body interaction strictly speaking, but only a non-causal relationship of harmony, parallelism, or correspondence between mind and body.
Without going full-scale longitudinal, causal modeling more strictly speaking will of course remain impossible.
Also, the causal relationships implied by the SEM may be true, but strictly speaking, because of the non-experimental or correlational nature of the data, there is nothing in the SEM that magically transforms correlational data into causal conclusions.
Strictly speaking, it only casts doubt on the theory of causation that defines causation in terms of the presence of an active causal route.
Strictly speaking, they do.
Strictly speaking, no.
Strictly speaking, that's true.
Well, strictly speaking, not everyone.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com