 in terms of the existence of suitable experimental manipulations of mechanistic systems-be it of the surgical or nonsurgical type-are beyond repair. In particular, the basic idea behind Craver's MM, viz. to account for constitution by supplementing the resources of the most popular difference-making theory of causation, interventionism, by a parthood and a mutuality tweak, is not just misguided because of unrealistic surgicality requirements but because phenomena and their constituents simply are not difference-makers of An Abductive Theory of Constitution 11 one another. Rather, they share common difference-makers in their mutual causal past, that is, they are unbreakably coupled via common causes. The fundamental differences between causation and constitution yield that these two relations must be theoretically accounted for in fundamentally different terms and uncovered by following fundamentally different methodological protocols. 4 An abductive alternative In this section, we propose an alternative theory of constitutive relevance, which avoids MM's problems by further developing the main finding of the previous sections: the characteristic feature of constitution is not the possibility of surgical topdown and bottom-up interventions on mechanisms, but the impossibility of such interventions. Whatever makes a difference on both levels of a mechanism necessarily does so along different causal paths, because constituents are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena and, hence, not themselves causally related to the latter. Therefore, while causal dependencies can be broken by means of suitable surgical interventions, there do not exist surgical interventions that could break constitutive dependencies. Rather, constitution relates macro and micro levels in such a way that they are unbreakably coupled via common causes. To render this idea precise, it must first be emphasized that the common-cause coupling that marks constitution is characterized by an asymmetry between macro and micro levels, which stems from the fact that a phenomenon Ψ of a given mechanism supervenes on its constituents in a constituting set Φ = {Φ1,...,Φn}, but not vice versa. In consequence, every cause of Ψ is necessarily associated with a change in at least one element of Φ and, thus, it causes the latter change on a path that does not go through Ψ. That is, every cause of Ψ necessarily is a common cause of Ψ and at least one element of Φ. The same, however, does not hold for causes of the constituents in Φ. Supervenience does not exclude the possibility of causing changes in the supervenience base that are not associated with a change in the supervening property. For instance
in terms of the existence of suitable experimental manipulations of mechanistic system - constitute it of the surgical or nonsurgical type - are beyond repair. In particular, the basic estimate behind Craver's MM, viz. to account for constitution by supplement the resources of the most democratic remainder - making hypothesis of causation, interventionism, by a parthood and a mutuality tweak, is not just misguided because of unrealistic surgicality prerequisite but because phenomena and their constituents simply are not difference - makers of An Abductive Theory of Constitution 11 one another. preferably, they share common difference - manufacturer in their mutual causal past, that is, they are unbreakably coupled via common cause. The fundamental differences between causation and constitution yield that these two sexual intercourse must be theoretically accounted for in fundamentally different terms and uncovered by follow fundamentally different methodological protocols. 4 An abductive alternative In this section, we propose an alternative theory of constitutive relevance, which avoids MM's problem by further developing the independent determination of the former sections: the characteristic feature of constitution is not the possibility of surgical topdown and bottom - up interventions on mechanisms, but the impossibility of such interventions. Whatever makes a remainder on both levels of a mechanism necessarily does so along different causal paths, because part are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena and, hence, not themselves causally related to the latter. Therefore, while causal dependencies can be violate by means of suitable surgical interventions, there do not exist surgical interventions that could break constituent dependencies. Rather, constitution relates macro and micro levels in such a way that they are unbreakably coupled via common causes. To picture this idea accurate, it must first be emphasized that the common - cause coupling that chump constitution is qualify by an asymmetry between macro and micro levels, which stem from the fact that a phenomenon Ψ of a given mechanism supervenes on its constituents in a constituting set Φ = { Φ1,... ,Φn }, but not vice versa. In consequence, every cause of Ψ is necessarily associate with a change in at least one component of Φ and, thus, it causes the latter change on a path that does not go through Ψ. That is, every campaign of Ψ necessarily is a common campaign of Ψ and at least one element of Φ. The same, however, does not hold for causes of the constituents in Φ. Supervenience does not exclude the hypothesis of causing changes in the supervenience base that are not associated with a change in the supervening property. For instance
 in terms of the existence uf suitable expgrumentan manilulationr of mechanistic systems-be iv of the wurgical or nonsurgicau type-are beyond eepamr. In particular, the basle idez behnnv Craver's MM, vie. to account for constituthov yy supplementing the resources of thq most looular differense-malyng fheory of causation, interventionisj, by a karthood and a mutiality tweak, is not just mlsgulded because of ungealistic sodgisqlity requirdments but because phehomena and their constituents skmply are not dufderftce-makers oh An Afductive Theory of Cmnstituyion 11 one anotmer. Rethee, they share common dmfference-makers in treir mutudl causal past, that iw, thei are unbfwakxblg roulled vla rommon causss. The fundqmental differences bqneeen causatikn and cjnstitution yield that these two relatimns must be theoretically qccounted for in fundwmentally different terms and uncovered by following fundakentamuy blnferdbt methodological protocols. 4 An abductive altergztovv In this section, we propose aj sjternative thgory of cohstitutive relevanfe, whicr avouds MM's pwoblrms by further developing tye main findpng if the previous seetions: the ckaractgristiv feature of constitutiun ia not the plssibilitg of surgical topaowk atd bottom-up interventions jn mechanmsms, yut the kmpoxsibilyty of sucj intcsventions. Whatever maked d differenfe on both levels of a mechanism necessarily coas vo along diffcrent causal paehs, because coustituencs are spatiotemioral parvs of phenomqna and, hence, jot themselvxs causaljy rwlatwd to tfd latter. Theregore, whilv eausal dependencies can be nrokev by means of sunuaboe surgical intrrvdntyojs, trare do not efist sufbical intervtutiivs tnat could break consditufive dependencies. Tabher, consjitution welates macro and micro levels ln surh a wey thay trey are unbreakably coupled viz common faufes. To rendew thls iqea precisz, it must first be emphasized that the cimmon-cause couplint that marks constijutlon is chararterizqd by an dsymmetry between maxro and micro levtls, which stems from ths fact that a phenomenon Ψ of a given mechanism supervenes on its constituents in a cinstitntyng set Φ = {Φ1,...,Φn}, but not nicz vzrsa. In condxquence, every cauxe of Ψ is necessarily associatev with a cvauge in at least one element og Φ and, thus, it zauses the latter change on a payh that does not go through Ψ. Thst is, every cause of Ψ negessarily is a common canse of Ψ and at least one enemenr of Φ. Tye swme, however, dues nlt hold flr ceuszs of the constituents in Φ. Supervwniencw foes not exclude the possiblllty of causigg changes in ths sulfrvenkence base thst are not asspciated with a changv ig the supervenuhg property. Gor insnance
in terms of the existence of suitable of systems-be it the surgical or particular, basic idea behind MM, viz. to for constitution by supplementing the resources the most popular difference-making theory of causation, interventionism, by a parthood and a tweak, is not just misguided because of unrealistic surgicality requirements but because phenomena their simply not of An Abductive Theory of Constitution 11 one another. Rather, they share common difference-makers in their causal past, that is, they are unbreakably coupled common causes. The fundamental between causation and constitution yield these relations must theoretically for fundamentally different terms uncovered by following fundamentally different methodological protocols. 4 An abductive alternative In this section, we propose an theory of which avoids problems further the main finding previous sections: the characteristic feature of the possibility of surgical topdown and bottom-up interventions mechanisms, but impossibility of such interventions. Whatever makes difference on both levels of a mechanism necessarily so along different causal paths, because constituents are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena and, hence, not related to the latter. while causal dependencies be by of surgical interventions, do not exist surgical interventions that could break constitutive dependencies. Rather, relates macro and micro levels in such a way that unbreakably via common causes. render this idea precise, must be emphasized that the that constitution an between and micro levels, which from the fact that a Ψ of a given in a constituting set Φ = {Φ1,...,Φn}, but vice versa. In consequence, every cause of is necessarily associated with a change in at least one element of and, thus, the latter change on a path that does go through Ψ. That every cause of Ψ necessarily is a common cause Ψ at least element of Φ. same, however, does hold for causes constituents in Supervenience not of causing changes in the supervenience that not associated with a change the For instance
 in terms of the existence of suItable expeRimenTal ManIpUlatIons Of mechanistic sYStemS-be it of the surgical or noNsurgIcAL typE-ArE beyoNd repaiR. in PARtiCuLaR, thE bASiC idea BehInd CravEr's MM, viz. to AccOuNt for constitUTiOn by suppleMenTing the resouRceS of the MoSt pOPular DifFerenCe-makiNG theorY of causatIoN, IntervENtionisM, BY a PartHood and a mutuality TWeAK, is not just misgUided bEcAUsE OF unReaListic surgIcAlity REquiremENtS BUT beCAuse phenomena And their conSTitUents sImPly ARe not dIfferEnCE-maKers of An AbdUctiVe Theory oF ConstITution 11 oNE anotheR. RatheR, thEy sHare COmMoN diFfERenCE-mAkeRS in Their mutUaL cAusal Past, THAT Is, thEy aRe unBreakAbly coupled viA coMmon CAusEs. The FundaMentAl DiffeRences BetweEn Causation and conStitUtion yielD thAt TheSe Two reLAtions MusT be TheoretIcally aCCouNtED FOr In fundamentally difFeRENt Terms and UncoveREd By FOllowing FuNdaMentALLy difFereNT mEthodoloGical pROtOcOls. 4 An abDuCtive aLtErnAtiVe In tHIs seCtion, wE propose An altERnative theory oF Constitutive rELeVANcE, WhicH avOids MM's probLems BY furTher DEvEloPIng thE main FiNDiNG of the previous sectiOnS: the chAractEristic featurE of constitUTIOn is not tHe poSSiBIlity of surgicaL topdOwn and bottOM-up interVentiOns on mecHanisms, buT THe impossIbiLitY of SucH INtErventions. WhaTEVer mAkEs a diffEreNce on boTh lEveLs oF a mEcHanism necEssarily DoEs So AlOng DiffeREnt causaL pAthS, bEcaUse coNStitueNts arE spaTiOtEMpoRal partS Of PHEnomEnA aNd, heNce, NoT themSelvES caUsally rElated to tHe lATter. thErEfore, whIle causal depeNdEncies can bE bRokEn by meANS of suitaBle surgical interventionS, There do Not Exist SurgIcal interVenTions tHat COuld brEak conStituTiVe dEPEndenCIEs. ratHeR, constitutION reLates MaCro aNd micro Levels in such a way thAT thEy are unbreakaBly CoupLED vIa cOMmON caUsES. To RENder this idea preCise, it must FiRSt Be emphasizED thAt The commOn-cause CouplINg that mArks constItution is ChAracTERizEd by an asymMetry betWeen macro ANd micRO lEvels, WhiCh stemS fRom The faCt that A PheNomenOn Ψ of a GiVen mecHanisM sUperveneS on its constituents in a coNstituTing sEt Φ = {φ1,...,Φn}, but not VicE VerSa. In conseQuenCe, every cauSe oF Ψ iS neceSsaRIly asSociATeD wiTH a chaNge iN At least onE ElEmeNT Of φ and, thus, it cAUSEs tHe latTer CHange oN a paTh that does not go thROugh Ψ. That is, eveRy caUSE of ψ neCEssaRiLy is a common cauSe oF Ψ AND at least OnE element of Φ. the same, hOwEVer, doEs not hOld for Causes oF THe COnstitUentS in φ. SupervenIenCe DOes not eXcLuDE the poSsibIlIty of cAusing CHangES In the supervenienCe basE THat arE Not AssocIaTed with A ChanGe in the supErvening proPerty. FOr inStancE
 in terms of the existence  of suitab le ex per ime nt al m anip ulations of me c hani stic systems-be it ofthe s ur g ical or  nons urgical ty p e -ar ebe yon dr ep air.Inparticu lar, the b asi cidea behindC ra ver's MM,viz . to account  fo r cons ti tut i on by  su pplem enting the re sources o ft he mos t  popula r di ffer ence-making theor y  o f  causation, in terven ti o ni s m , b y a  parthoodan d a m u tuality tw e a k , i s  not just mis guided beca u seof unr ea lis t ic sur gical it y  re quirementsbutbecause p henome n a and t h eir con stitue nts  si mply ar enot  d i ffe r en ce- m ake rs of An  A bd uctiv e Th e o r y  ofCon stit ution  11 one anoth er.  Rat h er,  they  shar e co mm on di fferen ce-ma ke rs in their mut ualcausal pa st,  t hat  i s, th e y areunb rea kably c oupledv iaco m m o ncauses. The fundam en t a ldifferen ces be t we en causatio nand  con s t ituti on y i el d that t hese t w ore lations  m ust be  t heo ret icall y  acc ounted  for infunda m entally differ e nt terms andu nc o v er e d by  fo llowing fun dame n tall y di f fe ren t  meth odolo gi c al protocols. 4 An abd uc tive a ltern ative In this  section,w e proposean a l te r native theoryof co nstitutive relevanc e, wh ich avoi ds MM's p r o blems by  fu rth erdev e l op ing the mainf i ndin gof thepre vious s ect ion s:the  c haracteri stic fea tu re  o fcon stitu t ion is n ot  th epos sibil i ty ofsurgi calto pd o wnand bot t om - u p in te rv enti ons  o n mec hani s ms,  but th e impossi bil i ty o fsu ch inte rventions. Wh at ever makes  a  di fferen c e  on both  levels of a mechanismn ecessar ily  does  soalong dif fer ent ca usa l  paths , beca use c on sti t u entsa r espa ti otemporalp a rts  of p he nome na and,  hence, not themse l ves  causally rel ate d to t he  la t te r . T he r efo r e , while causaldependenci es ca n be broke n  by  m eans of  suitab le su r gical i nterventi ons, ther edo n o t  ex ist surgic al inter ventionst hat c o ul d bre akconsti tu tiv e dep endenc i es.  Rath er, co ns tituti on re la tes macr o and micro levels in s uch away t hat  they are  un b rea kably cou pled  via commo n c aus es. T o r e nderthis id eap recis e, i t  must fir s tbee m ph asized that t h e c ommon -ca u se cou plin g that marks cons t itution is cha ract e r ize d b y  anas ymmetry betwee n m ac r o  and mic ro  levels, wh ich stem sf rom t he fac t that  a phen o m en o n Ψ of  a g ive n mechani smsu p ervenes  o ni ts con stit ue nts in  a con s titu t i ng set Φ = {Φ1,. ..,Φn } ,  butn otviceve rsa. In cons equence, e very causeof Ψ i s ne cessa rily as so ciated  wi th  a changei n at leas t one  elemen tof Φ  an d, thu s, i t cause s th elat ter chang e on apa t h t hatdoesno t go  throughΨ . That i s,e very ca us e o f Ψ nece s sa r i ly is a co mmo n cau s e  of Ψ anda t le a st one e lement  of Φ.  The sa m e,ho wever,doe s not holdfor cause s  of  t he c onstitue nt s in  Φ . S up ervenience does  not exc lude the p ossibi lit y  ofc ausing  c hanges in th e sup er v enience b ase  that a r e n otass ocia ted  wit h  a change in the superve ning  prop e rty . For  inst an ce
 in_terms of_the existence of suitable_experimental manipulations_of_mechanistic systems-be_it_of the surgical_or nonsurgical type-are_beyond repair. In particular,_the basic idea_behind_Craver's MM, viz. to account for constitution by supplementing the resources of the most_popular_difference-making theory_of_causation,_interventionism, by a parthood and_a mutuality tweak, is not_just misguided_because of unrealistic surgicality requirements but because phenomena_and_their constituents simply_are not difference-makers of An Abductive Theory of Constitution_11 one another. Rather, they share_common difference-makers in_their_mutual_causal past, that is,_they are unbreakably coupled via common_causes. The fundamental differences between causation_and constitution yield that these two relations_must be theoretically accounted for in_fundamentally different terms and uncovered_by following_fundamentally different methodological protocols. 4_An abductive alternative_In this_section, we propose_an alternative theory of constitutive relevance,_which avoids MM's_problems by further developing the main_finding_of the previous_sections:_the_characteristic feature_of constitution is_not_the possibility_of_surgical topdown and bottom-up interventions on_mechanisms,_but the impossibility of such interventions. Whatever_makes a difference on_both_levels of a mechanism_necessarily does so along different_causal paths, because constituents are spatiotemporal_parts of_phenomena and,_hence, not themselves causally related to the latter. Therefore, while causal_dependencies can be broken by means_of suitable surgical interventions,_there do_not_exist surgical interventions_that_could break_constitutive dependencies. Rather, constitution relates macro and_micro levels_in such a way that they_are unbreakably coupled via_common_causes. To render this idea precise,_it must first be emphasized that_the common-cause coupling that marks_constitution_is_characterized by an asymmetry between_macro and micro levels, which stems_from the fact_that a phenomenon Ψ of a given_mechanism_supervenes on its constituents in a_constituting_set Φ = {Φ1,...,Φn}, but not_vice_versa._In consequence, every cause of_Ψ is necessarily associated with a_change in at least one element of Φ and,_thus, it causes_the latter change on a_path_that_does not go through Ψ. That is, every cause of_Ψ necessarily_is a common_cause of Ψ and at least one element of Φ._The same, however, does not hold for_causes of the constituents in Φ. Supervenience does not exclude the_possibility of causing changes in the supervenience base_that are not associated with a change_in the supervening property._For_instance