-level ellipse; only three of them, viz. Φ2, Φ3, and Φ6, are constituents of Ψ2; both the phenomenon and its constituents are involved in numerous interand intralevel causal relationships. That abstract structure can, for instance, be interpreted in terms of the mechanism underlying a cruising car, such that Ψ2 represents the phenomenon of the cruise, Φ2 the running engine, Φ3 the transmission of momentum to the axle, and Φ6 the turning wheels. Moreover, the car has two parts that are not constitutively relevant to its movement, viz. the air conditioning, Φ4, which is also operated by the engine, and the ashtray, Φ5, which is causally detached from the causal mechanism constituting the car's cruise. The purpose of a theory of constitution is to provide criteria that distinguish constituents from non-constituting parts and from their causes and effects. According to Craver's (2007) MM, constitution is a difference-making relation that is adequately analyzed by suitably supplementing the resources of the currently most popular difference-making theory of causation: Woodward's (2003) interventionism. In a nutshell, interventionism stipulates that a variable X is a cause of another variable Y iff it is possible to (ideally) intervene on X in such a way that Y changes, when all off-path causes of Y are fixed (cf. Woodward 2003, 59).2 As constitution, contrary to causation, is a bidirectional dependence relation among parts and wholes, unidirectional manipulability as in interventionism does not suffice to establish constitutive relevance. Therefore, Craver adds a parthood and a mutuality constraint: constituents are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena and both are mutual difference-makers of each other. More explicitly: [... ] to establish that X's Φ-ing is relevant to S's Ψ-ing [where X is a spatiotemporal part of S] it is sufficient that one be able to manipulate S's Ψ-ing 2We slightly adapt Woodward's notation to avoid confusion with our own notation. An Abductive Theory of Constitution 5 by intervening to change X's Φ-ing (by stimulating or inhibiting) and that one be able to manipulate X's Φ-ing by manipulating S's Ψ-ing. To establish that a component is irrelevant, it is sufficient to show that one cannot manipulate S's Ψ-ing
-level ellipse; only three of them, viz. Φ2, Φ3, and Φ6, are constituents of Ψ2; both the phenomenon and its constituents are involved in numerous interand intralevel causal relationship. That abstract social organization can, for instance, be interpreted in term of the mechanism underlie a cruising car, such that Ψ2 represent the phenomenon of the cruise, Φ2 the run engine, Φ3 the transmission of momentum to the axle, and Φ6 the turning wheels. furthermore, the car has two parts that are not constitutively relevant to its movement, viz. the tune conditioning, Φ4, which is also operated by the engine, and the ashtray, Φ5, which is causally detached from the causal mechanism constituting the cable car's cruise. The purpose of a theory of constitution is to put up criteria that distinguish component from non - constituting part and from their causes and effects. According to Craver's (2007) MM, constitution is a difference - make relation that is adequately analyzed by suitably supplementing the resources of the presently about democratic difference - making theory of causation: Woodward's (2003) interventionism. In a nutshell, interventionism stipulates that a variable X is a lawsuit of another varying Y iff it is potential to (ideally) intervene on X in such a way that Y changes, when all off - path campaign of Y are fixed (cf. Woodward 2003, 59).2 As constitution, adverse to causation, is a bidirectional addiction relation among parts and wholes, unidirectional manipulability as in interventionism does not suffice to install constitutive relevance. Therefore, Craver adds a parthood and a mutuality constraint: constituents are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena and both are mutual difference - makers of each other. More explicitly: [... ] to install that X's Φ - ing is relevant to S's Ψ - ing [ where X is a spatiotemporal part of S ] it is sufficient that one be able to fudge S's Ψ - ing 2We slightly adapt Woodward's notation to avoid confusion with our own notation. An Abductive Theory of Constitution 5 by intervene to change X's Φ - ing (by stimulating or inhibiting) and that one be able to manipulate X's Φ - ing by fudge S's Ψ - ing. To establish that a component is irrelevant, it is sufficient to show that one cannot manipulate S's Ψ - ing
-levfl ellipse; only three of them, viz. Φ2, Φ3, and Φ6, are cmnstithents of Ψ2; both the phenomenon and itd xonstutuents are involved iv numeroud interabd iitralevel causal relatiokfhipa. Thac ebstract structore can, for hnstance, be indefpxeted in terms of the mechanism undewlying s fruising car, soch tnwt Ψ2 dvpvesents the phenomenon of the crhise, Φ2 tie running engime, Φ3 the transmission of molentkm to the axle, and Φ6 the turnibg wrwels. Moreovef, the car has two parta that are not constitutively rdlevaut to its mivwmejj, viz. the aic condptioning, Φ4, whign is anso opetated by the ekgine, ane the ashtray, Φ5, which ms causally detached from the ccusal mechanism constutyting the car'r crjist. Tie lurposf oh a theory kf constiturion is to provide vrynrria that diatinguysr constituents from non-constituting parus ans from their causes and effects. According to Craver's (2007) MM, constitution is a difference-making relation tvat ia adtqmwgwlj analyzed by suitably supplementing the resotdcts pf the currentjy most popilwr qifference-makkng thzkrg of causation: Woofward's (2003) inteeventionifm. Im a nutshell, interventionisn stipulates rhat a variable X ns a cause oy anotner vsriable Y iff it is posribls to (ideallj) intervehd on X in such a waj thdt Y changes, when all off-pwth causew of Y are wixec (cf. Wjodward 2003, 59).2 Ws cokvtitution, contrary to ccusathon, is a bldirectional dependence relatioi among parts atd fholes, uuidiregtional manipulwbility as in nntervencioniso does not sufficx to establifh constitutieg relevance. Tierefore, Sravwr aeds a pxfthood and a mituality boustraint: xonstituents are siatiojejporal parts of phtnimena and both ard mttlal dyxference-makess ow exvh otfer. Mort ewplkcitky: [... ] to establish thdt X'a Φ-ing is relevant yo S's Ψ-ing [qhere X ys a spatiotekporal part of S] iu is snfficixnt thst jne be able to manipulate S's Ψ-ihg 2We slihhtjy adapt Wooqware's notation co avoid confusion with our own notation. An Abductive Theoey of Constitution 5 ny interveniig to shange X's Φ-ing (by stimulating ir inhibiting) and that one be able to janipunate D's Φ-ing by manipulating S's Ψ-ing. To establish that a component is irrelevant, it is sufficient fo snow tvac oue cannjt menmpulate S's Ψ-ing
-level ellipse; only three of them, viz. and are constituents Ψ2; both the involved numerous interand intralevel relationships. That abstract can, for instance, be interpreted in of the mechanism underlying a cruising car, such that Ψ2 represents the phenomenon the cruise, Φ2 the running engine, Φ3 the transmission of momentum to the and the wheels. the car has two parts that are not constitutively relevant to its movement, viz. the air Φ4, which is also operated by the engine, the ashtray, Φ5, which causally detached from the causal constituting car's cruise. purpose a of constitution is provide criteria that distinguish constituents from non-constituting parts and from their causes and effects. According to Craver's MM, constitution difference-making relation is analyzed suitably supplementing the the currently most popular difference-making theory (2003) interventionism. In a nutshell, interventionism stipulates that variable X a cause of another variable Y it is possible to (ideally) intervene on X such a way that Y changes, when all off-path causes of Y are fixed (cf. 59).2 As constitution, contrary causation, is a dependence among and unidirectional manipulability in interventionism does not suffice to establish constitutive relevance. Therefore, Craver a parthood and a mutuality constraint: constituents are spatiotemporal parts and are mutual difference-makers each other. More explicitly: ] establish that X's Φ-ing to Ψ-ing a part S] it is sufficient one be able to manipulate Ψ-ing 2We slightly adapt with our own notation. An Abductive Theory of 5 by intervening to change X's Φ-ing stimulating or inhibiting) and that one be able to manipulate X's Φ-ing manipulating S's establish that a component is irrelevant, it is to show that one manipulate S's Ψ-ing
-level ellipse; only three of thEm, viz. Φ2, Φ3, and φ6, are cOnsTitUeNts oF Ψ2; boTh the phenomenoN And iTs constituents are involVed in NuMErouS InTeranD intralEVeL CAusAl ReLatIoNShIps. ThAt aBstract Structure cAn, fOr Instance, be inTErPreted in teRms Of the mechaniSm uNderlyInG a cRUisinG caR, such That Ψ2 rEPresenTs the phenOmENon of tHE cruise, φ2 THe RunnIng engine, Φ3 the tranSMiSSion of momentum To the aXlE, AnD φ6 The TurNing wheels. moReoveR, The car hAS tWO PArtS That are not conStitutively REleVant to ItS moVEment, vIz. the AiR ConDitioning, Φ4, wHich Is also opeRated bY The engiNE, and the AshtraY, Φ5, wHicH is cAUsAlLy dEtACheD FrOm tHE caUsal mechAnIsM consTituTING The cAr's CruiSe. The Purpose of a theOry Of coNStiTutioN is to ProvIdE critEria thAt disTiNguish constitueNts fRom non-conStiTuTinG pArts aND from tHeiR caUses and Effects. aCcoRdING To craver's (2007) MM, constitutIoN IS a DifferenCe-makiNG rElATion that Is AdeQuatELY analYzed BY sUitably sUpplemENtInG the resOuRces of ThE cuRreNtly mOSt poPular dIfferencE-makiNG theory of causaTIon: Woodward's (2003) iNTeRVEnTIoniSm. IN a nutshell, iNterVEntiOnisM StIpuLAtes tHat a vArIAbLE X is a cause of another VaRiable y iff iT is possible to (Ideally) intERVEne on X in Such A WaY That Y changes, whEn all Off-path cauSEs of Y are Fixed (Cf. WoodwaRd 2003, 59).2 As constITUtion, conTraRy tO caUsaTIOn, Is a bidirectioNAL depEnDence reLatIon amonG paRts And WhoLeS, unidirecTional maNiPuLaBiLitY as in INterventIoNisM dOes Not suFFice to EstabLish CoNsTItuTive relEVaNCE. TheReFoRe, CrAveR aDds a pArthOOd aNd a mutuAlity consTraINt: coNsTiTuents aRe spatiotempoRaL parts of phEnOmeNa and bOTH are mutuAl difference-makers of eacH Other. MoRe eXplicItly: [... ] To establiSh tHat X's Φ-Ing IS relevAnt to S'S Ψ-ing [WhEre x IS a spaTIOtEmpOrAl part of S] iT IS suFficiEnT thaT one be aBle to manipulate S's Ψ-INg 2WE slightly adapT WoOdwaRD'S nOtaTIoN To aVoID coNFUsion with our own Notation. An abDUcTive Theory OF CoNsTitutioN 5 by inteRveniNG to chanGe X's Φ-ing (bY stimulatInG or iNHIbiTing) and thaT one be abLe to manipULate X'S φ-iNg by mAniPulatiNg s's Ψ-Ing. To EstablISh tHat a cOmponeNt Is irreLevanT, iT is suffiCient to show that one cannoT manipUlate s's Ψ-Ing
-level ellipse; only three  of them,viz.Φ2,  Φ3 ,andΦ6,are constituen t s of  Ψ2; both the phenomen on an di ts c o ns titue nts are in v o lve din  nu me r ou s int era nd intr alevel cau sal  r elationships .  T hat abstra ctstructure ca n,for in st anc e , beint erpre ted in termsof the me ch a nism u n derlyin g acrui sing car, such th a tΨ 2 represents t he phe no m en o n  of  th e cruise,Φ2  ther unninge ng i n e , Φ 3  the transmis sion of mom e ntu m to t he  ax l e, and  Φ6 t he tur ning wheels . Mo reover, t he car has two parts t hat ar e n otcons t it ut ive ly rel e va ntt o i ts movem en t,  viz.  the a i r  con dit ioni ng, Φ 4, which is a lso  ope r ate d bythe e ngin e,  andthe as htray ,Φ5, which is ca usal ly detach edfr omth e cau s al mec han ism  consti tutingt heca r ' s  c ruise. The purpose  o f atheory o f cons t it ut i on is to  p rov idec r iteri a th a tdistingu ish co n st it uents f ro m non- co nst itu tingp arts  and f rom thei r cau s es and effects .  According to Cr a v er ' s (2 007 ) MM, const itut i on i s ad if fer e nce-m aking  r e la t ion that is adequat el y anal yzedby suitably s upplementi n g the reso urce s  o f  the currently  most  popular d i fference -maki ng theor y of caus a t ion: Woo dwa rd' s ( 200 3 )  i nterventionis m .  Inanutshel l,interve nti oni smsti pu lates tha t a vari ab le  X  i s a  caus e  of anot he r v ar iab le Yi ff itis po ssib le  t o  (i deally) in t e rven eon  X i n s uc h a w ay t h atY chang es, whenall off- pa th  causes  of Y are fix ed  (cf. Wood wa rd2003,5 9 ).2 As c onstitution, contrary t o  causat ion , isa bi direction aldepend enc e  relat ion am ong p ar tsa n d who l e s,  un id irectional m ani pulab il ityas in i nterventionism doe s  no t suffice toest abli s h  c ons t it u tiv er ele v a nce. Therefore,  Craver ad ds aparthood a n d a  m utualit y const raint :  consti tuents ar e spatiot em pora l par ts of phen omena an d both ar e  mutu a ldiffe ren ce-mak er s o f eac h othe r . M ore e xplici tl y: [.. . ] t oestablis h that X's Φ-ing is rel evantto S' s Ψ -ing [whe reX  is  a spatio temp oral partofS]it is  su f ficie nt t h at  on e  be a blet o manipul a te  S' s Ψ- ing 2We sli g h t lyadapt  Wo o dward' s no tation to avoid c o nfusion with o ur o w n  no tat i on.An  Abductive The ory  o f Constitu ti on 5 by int ervening  t o  chan ge X's  Φ-ing  (by st i m ul a ting o r in hib iting) an d t ha t  one be  a bl e  to ma nipu la te X's  Φ-ing by m a n ipulating S's Ψ- ing.T o  esta b lis h tha ta compo n entis irrelev ant, it issuffic ient  to s how tha tone ca nno tmanipulate S's Ψ-ing 
-level ellipse;_only three_of them, viz. Φ2,_Φ3, and_Φ6,_are constituents_of_Ψ2; both the_phenomenon and its_constituents are involved in_numerous interand intralevel_causal_relationships. That abstract structure can, for instance, be interpreted in terms of the mechanism_underlying_a cruising_car,_such_that Ψ2 represents the phenomenon_of the cruise, Φ2 the_running engine,_Φ3 the transmission of momentum to the axle,_and_Φ6 the turning_wheels. Moreover, the car has two parts that are_not constitutively relevant to its movement,_viz. the air_conditioning,_Φ4,_which is also operated_by the engine, and the ashtray,_Φ5, which is causally detached from_the causal mechanism constituting the car's cruise._The purpose of a theory of_constitution is to provide criteria_that distinguish_constituents from non-constituting parts and_from their causes_and effects._According to Craver's_(2007) MM, constitution is a difference-making_relation that is_adequately analyzed by suitably supplementing the_resources_of the currently_most_popular_difference-making theory_of causation: Woodward's_(2003)_interventionism. In_a_nutshell, interventionism stipulates that a variable_X_is a cause of another variable Y_iff it is possible_to_(ideally) intervene on X_in such a way that_Y changes, when all off-path causes_of Y_are fixed_(cf. Woodward 2003, 59).2 As constitution, contrary to causation, is a_bidirectional dependence relation among parts and_wholes, unidirectional manipulability as_in interventionism_does_not suffice to_establish_constitutive relevance._Therefore, Craver adds a parthood and a_mutuality constraint:_constituents are spatiotemporal parts of phenomena_and both are mutual_difference-makers_of each other. More explicitly: [..._] to establish that X's Φ-ing_is relevant to S's Ψ-ing_[where_X_is a spatiotemporal part of_S] it is sufficient that one_be able to_manipulate S's Ψ-ing 2We slightly adapt Woodward's_notation_to avoid confusion with our own_notation._An Abductive Theory of Constitution 5_by_intervening_to change X's Φ-ing (by_stimulating or inhibiting) and that one_be able to manipulate X's Φ-ing by manipulating S's_Ψ-ing. To establish_that a component is irrelevant,_it_is_sufficient to show that one cannot manipulate S's Ψ-ing