The role of causation and counterfactuals in causal decision theory is vexed and disputed. Recently, Brian Hedden (2023) argues that we should abandon causal decision theory in favour of an alternative: counterfactual decision theory. I argue that, pace Hedden, counterfactual decision theory is not a competitor to, but rather a version of, causal decision theory – the most popular version by far. I provide textual evidence that the founding fathers of causal decision theory (Stalnaker, Gibbard, Harper, Lewis, Skyrms, Sobel, and Joyce) all endorse counterfactual decision theories. I additionally discuss why these theories came to be called ‘causal’, rather than ‘counterfactual’. And I argue that, properly understood, causal decision theory escapes Hedden's objections.

中文翻译：

---

反事实决策理论是因果决策理论

因果关系和反事实在因果决策理论中的作用是令人烦恼和有争议的。最近，Brian Hedden（2023）认为我们应该放弃因果决策理论，转而采用另一种选择：反事实决策理论。我认为，反事实决策理论并不是因果决策理论的竞争对手，而是迄今为止最流行的版本——因果决策理论的一个版本。我提供了文本证据，证明因果决策理论的创始人（斯塔纳克、吉巴德、哈珀、刘易斯、斯凯姆斯、索贝尔和乔伊斯）都支持反事实决策理论。我还讨论了为什么这些理论被称为“因果”，而不是“反事实”。我认为，如果正确理解的话，因果决策理论不会受到赫登的反对。