 Therefore, after a finite number of expansions and severe but unsuccessful attempts at breaking recovered common-cause couplings, the satisfaction of Coupling and No De-Coupling by Φ and Ψ must be inductively inferred. This, in turn, licenses an abductive inference to the constitutive relevance of every Φi in Φ.10 By contrast, if variable set expansions reveal a surgical cause of Ψ that does not target any element of Φ, the common-cause coupling of Φ and Ψ is falsified. Note, however, that this does not also falsify the constitutive relevance of a particular Φi in Φ for Ψ. Even if Φ is not a constituting set, Φi might still be contained in another set Φ′, which is unbreakably common-cause coupled to Ψ. That is, while the common-cause coupling of Φ and Ψ is conclusively falsifiable, constitutive relevance of one particular Φi in Φ is not; rather, that Φi fails to be constitutively relevant to Φ can only be inductively corroborated by means of an extended unsuccessful search for a constituting set comprising Φi. Overall, as to NDC, every constitutional inference-be it to constitution or to non-constitution-inevitably involves an inductive leap. Independently of how exactly a viable method of constitutional discovery will eventually look like, we contend that the following methodological consequence of NDC must be respected by any such method. Even under ideal discovery circumstances, no finite number of experimental manipulations can be sufficient for conclusively warranting a constitutional inference. In particular, there does not exist a design for an experimentum crucis for constitution. Rather, establishing constitutive relations requires an extended test series exploring the whole space of 10There is no universal rule determining how much a variable set needs expanding before an inference to constitution as defined by NDC is justified. Rather, the justification depends on the particularities of a given research context (e.g., the size of the original baseline set, the nature of the mechanism under scrutiny, or the amount of available prior knowledge about that mechanism). An Abductive Theory of Constitution 17 possible ways of breaking the coupling of macro and micro levels. Only if these tests are unsuccessful, an inference to constitution is warranted. And since the evidence for the unbreakability of common-cause couplings is never conclusive, constitution can only be inductively corroborated. 6 Conclusion If, as is standardly assumed in mechanistic theorizing, constitution
Therefore, after a finite number of expansions and severe but abortive attempt at breaking recovered coarse - causal agent couplings, the satisfaction of Coupling and No De - Coupling by Φ and Ψ must be inductively guess. This, in go, licenses an abductive inference to the constituent relevance of every Φi in Φ.10 By line, if variable set expansion reveal a surgical cause of Ψ that does not target any element of Φ, the coarse - cause coupling of Φ and Ψ is falsified. Note, however, that this does not also fudge the constitutive relevance of a particular Φi in Φ for Ψ. Even if Φ is not a constituting set, Φi might even be contained in another set Φ′, which is unbreakably common - cause match to Ψ. That is, while the common - cause coupling of Φ and Ψ is conclusively falsifiable, constitutive relevance of one especial Φi in Φ is not; rather, that Φi fails to be constitutively relevant to Φ can only be inductively corroborated by means of an extended unsuccessful search for a constituting set comprising Φi. Overall, as to NDC, every constitutional inference - be it to constitution or to non - constitution - inevitably involves an inductive leap. Independently of how exactly a viable method acting of built-in discovery will eventually attend like, we compete that the following methodological consequence of NDC must be respected by any such method acting. Even under ideal discovery circumstances, no finite numeral of experimental manipulations can be sufficient for conclusively warranting a built-in inference. In particular, there does not exist a design for an experimentum crucis for constitution. Rather, establishing constitutive relation requires an extended test series explore the whole outer space of 10There is no universal rule determining how much a variable set motivation expanding before an inference to constitution as defined by NDC is apologize. Rather, the justification depends on the particularities of a given inquiry context (e.g., the size of the original baseline set, the nature of the mechanism under scrutiny, or the amount of available anterior knowledge about that mechanism). An Abductive Theory of Constitution 17 possible ways of breaking the yoke of macro and micro levels. Only if these examination are unsuccessful, an inference to constitution is guarantee. And since the evidence for the unbreakability of common - campaign couplings is never conclusive, united states constitution can only be inductively corroborated. 6 Conclusion If, as is standardly assumed in mechanistic theorizing, constitution
 Thfrefore, after a finite nmmber of expansions and severs but unruccessful attempts at breakmng eecovtged common-cause couplkngs, the datisfacrion if Couplinj and No De-Coulping uy Φ and Ψ must bg inductivelf inferred. Thiv, kn turn, licenses an abductive inferense to tne constitutive televsgce kf every Φi in Φ.10 By contrast, if varizble seu expansions reveak a surgical cause of Ψ thah dofs not target any flement of Φ, the xommon-cause zoupling of Φ and Ψ is fzlsified. Note, however, that this does not also daosivi the constivutive relevance on a pardicular Φi in Φ for Ψ. Evcn if Φ iw not a constituting vet, Φi might still fe contaiteb in another set Φ′, whixh is utbredkabut cummkn-rauae couolev to Ψ. That js, while thw common-cause couplond of Φ and Ψ is donclufidely falsifiable, constitutive relevance of one particular Φi in Φ iw not; rather, that Φi fwils to bq constitutively relevant to Φ can only be inductieely rofroyiratea bj means of an extended unsuccessful search fow a cpnstituting seb comprising Φi. Ovetapl, ws to NDC, evety conscjthtional inference-bf it to consritution jr tp non-constitution-inevitably involves an unductive leap. Indzpendently oy how gxactlu a viable method of coustitufional disclvery wilm eventually look lile, we conttvd that the folloring methidolpgical zonsgquence of NDC mudt be respected by any skch mgthod. Aven under ideal discovery circumstances, ip finite numnes ox experiientak manipulatiogs can be suffncient fjr covclusively warranving a constytutional infatence. In partmcular, thqre eoes not exkrt a design fot an expegiientym crucis for consbitutkkn. Rather, estaboisying constitutife felwtponx waquires an eftenaed yest reries trplifing the whole space of 10Dhers is no universal tuje deternining hjw much a varoable set needs exkandinj befoce an onfgrence to constitution as definsd by NDC is justified. Rwthev, thg justificacion depends on the particularities of a given research cobtext (e.g., the size oy uhe original uaselige set, tha nature of the mechqnism under scrutlny, or the amount of abailabne prlor knowledge about that mechanism). An Abductive Theory of Constitution 17 pissiblx rays of brezkinb the cjbpling jf mecco and micro leveks. Only if these tests are unsurcessful, at nnference to constitution is eafranted. And sknce the evidence for ths unbrealability of common-cause couplinbs is never conclusive, cpnstitutuon czn onlj bx inductively corrobprated. 6 Conxlusion If, ws is standaraly adsumed in meciannstic theorizing, constitution
Therefore, after a finite number of expansions but attempts at recovered common-cause couplings, No by Φ and must be inductively This, in turn, licenses an abductive to the constitutive relevance of every Φi in Φ.10 By contrast, if variable expansions reveal a surgical cause of Ψ that does not target any element Φ, common-cause of and Ψ is falsified. Note, however, that this does not also falsify the constitutive relevance of particular Φi in Φ for Ψ. Even if is not a constituting Φi might still be contained another Φ′, which unbreakably coupled Ψ. That is, the common-cause coupling of Φ and Ψ is conclusively falsifiable, constitutive relevance of one particular Φi in is not; Φi fails be relevant Φ can only corroborated by means of an extended a constituting set comprising Φi. Overall, as to every constitutional it to constitution or to non-constitution-inevitably an inductive leap. Independently of how exactly a method of constitutional discovery will eventually look like, we contend that the following methodological consequence must be respected by such method. Even ideal circumstances, finite of experimental can be sufficient for conclusively warranting a constitutional inference. In particular, does not exist a design for an experimentum crucis for establishing relations requires an test series exploring the space 10There is no universal how a expanding an to constitution as defined NDC is justified. Rather, the depends on the particularities (e.g., the size of the original baseline set, nature of the mechanism under scrutiny, or amount of available prior knowledge about that mechanism). An Abductive Theory of 17 possible breaking the coupling of macro and micro levels. if these tests are an inference to constitution is warranted. And since the for unbreakability of couplings is never constitution can only inductively corroborated. 6 as is assumed mechanistic
 Therefore, after a finite numbEr of expansIons aNd sEveRe But uNsucCessful attemptS At brEaking recovered common-cAuse cOuPLingS, ThE satiSfactioN Of cOUplInG aNd NO DE-coUplinG by φ and Ψ muSt be inductIveLy Inferred. This, IN tUrn, licenseS an Abductive infEreNce to tHe ConSTitutIve RelevAnce of EVery Φi In Φ.10 By contRaST, if varIAble set EXPaNsioNs reveal a surgical CAuSE of Ψ that does noT targeT aNY eLEMenT of φ, the common-CaUse coUPling of φ AnD ψ IS faLSified. Note, howEver, that thiS DoeS not alSo FalSIfy the ConstItUTivE relevance oF a paRticular ΦI in Φ foR ψ. Even if φ Is not a cOnstitUtiNg sEt, Φi MIgHt StiLl BE coNTaIneD In aNother seT Φ′, WhIch is UnbrEAKABly cOmmOn-caUse coUpled to Ψ. That iS, whIle tHE coMmon-cAuse cOuplInG of Φ aNd Ψ is cOncluSiVely falsifiable, ConsTitutive rEleVaNce Of One paRTiculaR Φi In Φ Is not; raTher, thaT φi fAiLS TO bE constitutively relEvANT tO Φ can onlY be indUCtIvELy corrobOrAteD by mEANs of aN extENdEd unsuccEssful SEaRcH for a coNsTitutiNg Set ComPrisiNG Φi. OVerall, As to NDC, eVery cONstitutional inFErence-be it to cONsTITuTIon oR to Non-constituTion-INeviTablY InVolVEs an iNductIvE LeAP. Independently of how ExActly a ViablE method of consTitutional DISCovery wiLl evENtUAlly look like, we ConteNd that the fOLlowing mEthodOlogical ConsequenCE Of NDC musT be ResPecTed BY AnY such method. EvEN UndeR iDeal disCovEry circUmsTanCes, No fInIte number Of experiMeNtAl MaNipUlatiONs can be sUfFicIeNt fOr conCLusiveLy warRantInG a COnsTitutioNAl INFereNcE. IN parTicUlAr, theRe doES noT exist a Design for An eXPeriMeNtUm cruciS for constitutIoN. Rather, estAbLisHing coNSTitutive Relations requires an exteNDed test SerIes exPlorIng the whoLe sPace of 10theRE is no uNiversAl rulE dEteRMIning HOW mUch A vAriable set NEEds ExpanDiNg beFore an iNference to constituTIon As defined by NDc is JustIFIeD. RaTHeR, The JuSTifICAtion depends on tHe particulArITiEs of a given REseArCh conteXt (e.g., the Size oF The origInal baselIne set, the NaTure OF The Mechanism uNder scruTiny, or the AMount OF aVailaBle Prior kNoWleDge abOut thaT MecHanisM). An AbdUcTive ThEory oF COnstitutIon 17 possible ways of breakiNg the cOupliNg oF macro and MicRO leVels. Only iF theSe tests are UnsUccEssfuL, an INfereNce tO CoNstITutioN is wARranted. AnD SiNce THE eVidence for tHE UNbrEakabIliTY of comMon-cAuse couplings is neVEr conclusive, coNstiTUTioN caN Only Be Inductively corRobOrATEd. 6 ConcluSiOn If, as is staNdardly aSsUMed in MechanIstic tHeoriziNG, CoNStitutIon
 Therefore, after a finite  number of  expa nsi ons  a nd s ever e but unsucces s fulattempts at breaking r ecove re d  com m on -caus e coupl i ng s ,  th esa tis fa c ti on of  Co uplingand No De- Cou pl ing by Φ and Ψmust be in duc tively infer red . This ,int urn,lic enses  an ab d uctive  inferenc et o thec onstitu t i ve  rel evance of every Φ i  i n  Φ.10 By contr ast, i fv ar i a ble  se t expansio ns  reve a l a sur g ic a l cau s e of Ψ that d oes not tar g etany el em ent of Φ,the c om m on- cause coupl ingof Φ andΨ is f a lsified .  Note,howeve r,tha t th i sdo esno t  al s ofal s ify  the con st it utive  rel e v a n ce o f a  par ticul ar Φi in Φ fo r Ψ . Ev e n i f Φ i s not  a c on stitu ting s et, Φ imight still becont ained inano th erse t Φ′, whichisunb reakabl y commo n -ca us e c ou pled to Ψ. That is ,w h il e the co mmon-c a us ec ouplingof  ΦandΨ is co nclu s iv ely fals ifiabl e ,co nstitut iv e rele va nce  of  onep arti cularΦi in Φis no t ; rather, that Φi fails to b e  c o n st i tuti vel y relevantto Φ canonly be  in d uctiv ely c or r ob o rated by means of a nextend ed un successful se arch for a c o nstituti ng s e tc omprising Φi.Overa ll, as toN DC, ever y con stitutio nal infer e n ce-be it  to  co nst itu t i on  or to non-co n s titu ti on-inev ita bly inv olv esanind uc tive leap . Indepe nd en tl yofhow e x actly avi abl emet hod o f  const ituti onal  d is c ove ry will ev e n tual ly  l ooklik e,  we c onte n d t hat the  followin g m e thod ol og ical co nsequence ofND C must bere spe cted b y any such  method. Even under ide a l disco ver y cir cums tances, n o f initenum b er ofexperi menta lman i p ulati o n scan  b e sufficie n t  fo r con cl usiv ely war ranting a constitu t ion al inference.  In  par t i cu lar ,  t h ere  d o esn o t exist a desig n for an e xp e ri mentum cru c isfo r const itution . Rat h er, est ablishing  constitu ti ve r e l ati ons requir es an ex tended te s t ser i es  expl ori ng the  w hol e spa ce of1 0Th ere i s no u ni versal  rule  d etermini ng how much a variableset ne eds e xpa nding bef ore aninference  toconstituti onasdefin edb y NDC  isj us tif i ed. R athe r , the jus t if ica t i on  depends on t h e p artic ula r itiesof a  given research c o ntext (e.g., t he s i z e o f t h e or ig inal baselineset ,t h e nature  o f the mecha nism und er scrut iny, o r theamounto f  a v ailabl e pr ior  knowledg e a bo u t thatme ch a nism).  AnAb ductiv e Theo r y of C onstitution 17 p ossib l e  ways ofbreak in g the c o upli ng of macr o and micro  level s. O nly i f these  t ests a reun successful ,  an infer enceto cons ti tuti onis war rant e d . And  sin ce  th e evidenc e fo r  t he unb reak abili ty  ofcommon-ca u se coupl ing s  is nev er  co n c lusive ,  c o n stitutioncan  only b e inductiv e ly c o rr o borat ed. 6Conclu sion If ,  as  i s stand ard l y  assumedin mechan i sti ctheo rizing,co nsti tu tio n
 Therefore,_after a_finite number of expansions_and severe_but_unsuccessful attempts_at_breaking recovered common-cause_couplings, the satisfaction_of Coupling and No_De-Coupling by Φ_and_Ψ must be inductively inferred. This, in turn, licenses an abductive inference to the_constitutive_relevance of_every_Φi_in Φ.10 By contrast, if_variable set expansions reveal a_surgical cause_of Ψ that does not target any element_of_Φ, the common-cause_coupling of Φ and Ψ is falsified. Note, however,_that this does not also falsify_the constitutive relevance_of_a_particular Φi in Φ_for Ψ. Even if Φ is_not a constituting set, Φi might_still be contained in another set Φ′,_which is unbreakably common-cause coupled to_Ψ. That is, while the_common-cause coupling_of Φ and Ψ is_conclusively falsifiable, constitutive_relevance of_one particular Φi_in Φ is not; rather, that_Φi fails to_be constitutively relevant to Φ can_only_be inductively corroborated_by_means_of an_extended unsuccessful search_for_a constituting_set_comprising Φi. Overall, as to NDC,_every_constitutional inference-be it to constitution or to_non-constitution-inevitably involves an inductive_leap._Independently of how exactly_a viable method of constitutional_discovery will eventually look like, we_contend that_the following_methodological consequence of NDC must be respected by any such method._Even under ideal discovery circumstances, no_finite number of experimental_manipulations can_be_sufficient for conclusively_warranting_a constitutional_inference. In particular, there does not exist_a design_for an experimentum crucis for constitution._Rather, establishing constitutive relations_requires_an extended test series exploring the_whole space of 10There is no_universal rule determining how much_a_variable_set needs expanding before an_inference to constitution as defined by_NDC is justified._Rather, the justification depends on the particularities_of_a given research context (e.g., the_size_of the original baseline set, the_nature_of_the mechanism under scrutiny, or_the amount of available prior knowledge_about that mechanism). An Abductive Theory of Constitution 17_possible ways of_breaking the coupling of macro_and_micro_levels. Only if these tests are unsuccessful, an inference to_constitution is_warranted. And since_the evidence for the unbreakability of common-cause couplings is never_conclusive, constitution can only be inductively corroborated._6 Conclusion If, as is standardly assumed in mechanistic theorizing, constitution