# Is Bayes-Ball algorithm enough to argue that correlation can imply causality?

You always hear that correlation does not imply causation. But taking a Bayesian perspective, can one counterargue this statement? I was reading the paper linked below (Bayes-Ball argument), and it seems that it isn't true to say that correlation does not imply causation.

Am I wrong to tell students that correlation does not imply causation? This meaning that correlation actually can imply causation.

• Correlation doesn't imply causation, indeed. But let's point out that almost nothing implies causation! Singling out correlation strikes me as a little unfair, and (although this isn't often said, I think) its appeal as a succinct principle comes down partly to affection for alliteration and assonance, so that it is a slogan or mantra that comes to mind easily and can be passed on just as easily to the next generation. Otherwise put, it's a meme that allows easy mimicry. – Nick Cox Jan 30 '18 at 15:06