Quote from PBL:
So why would it be the predominant prioritisation criterion in the Congonhas case?
Because this predominant cause was so devastating that it broke their neck! That's why!
By the way: AA587: The malhandling of the FO's rudder was indeed the primary cause. Just because he did it before and survived doesn't mean that he always would get away with it. You are thinking very simplistic if you argue that touching a rudder, forgetting a thrust lever, misinterpreting weather aso is always the same. It always depends on how strong the mistake was and how it interacted with other, not predominant causes.
Do you want to argue that we shouldn't prioritize causes, i.e. looking at all not essential contributing factors with the same emphazis, even if their influence on the outcome was minor or even neglectable?