in response to constructive criticisms. He also defended his revised formulation by appeal to an *Intuitive Principle* of local causality (IP), namely

> The direct causes (and effects) of events are near by, and even the indirect causes (and effects) are no further away than permitted by the velocity of light. \[2004, p. 239\]

Here is Bell’s revised formulation of *Local Causality* (LC):

> A theory will be said to be locally causal if the probabilities attached to values of local beables in a space-time region 1 are unaltered by specification of values of local beables in a space-like separated region 2, when what happens in the backward light cone of 1 is already sufficiently specified, for example by a full specification of local beables in a space-time region 3 \[a thick “slice” that fully closes the backward light cone of region 1 wholly outside the backward light cone of 2\]. (*op. cit.*, p. 240).

Bell \[1990\] then applies this condition to a schematic experimental scenario involving a linear polarization measurement on each photon in an entangled pair in which the polarizer setting $a$ and outcome recording $A$ for one photon occur in region 1, while those ($b,B$ ) for 