 by intervening to change X's Φ-ing and that one cannot manipulate X's Φ-ing by manipulating S's Ψ-ing. (Craver 2007, 159) MM provides a sufficient condition for constitutive relevance and a sufficient condition for constitutive irrelevance, which jointly amount to a sufficient and necessary condition for constitutive relevance-that is, to a complete definition of constitution.3 The core notion in its definiens is the modal notion of manipulability, which Craver (2007, §4.8.3) cashes out in terms of the existence of a possible ideal intervention as defined by Woodward (2003, 98). An ideal intervention on Ψ with respect to Φ is a variable IΨ taking one of its values, IΨ = in, and thereby surgically fixing the value of Ψ without having an impact on Φ that is not mediated via Ψ and without being correlated with any other (off-path) causes of Φ. In sum, MM amounts to the following (where the specificity of the variables is made explicit): (MM) Φ(X) is constitutively relevant to Ψ(S) iff (i) X (resp. X's Φ-ing) is a spatiotemporal part of S (resp. S's Ψ-ing); (ii) there exists a possible ideal intervention IΦ = im on Φ(X) w.r.t. Ψ(S) that is associated with a change in Ψ(S); (iii) there exists a possible ideal intervention IΨ = in on Ψ(S) w.r.t. Φ(X) that is associated with a change in Φ(X). One of the main selling points of MM is that it is directly operationalizable experimentally. The most straightforward way of establishing the possibility of mutually intervening on Φ and Ψ is to furnish actual bottom-up and top-down interventions of types IΦ = im and IΨ = in. If, and only if, such experiments reveal mutual difference-making among wholes and parts, the latter are proven to be constituents of the former. To use Figure 1 as an illustration, Φ2 (the car's engine) is conclusively shown to be a constituent of Ψ2 (the car's movement) by performing one intervention on Φ2 (e.g., taking one's foot off the accelerator) that is associated with a change in Ψ2
by intervening to change X's Φ - ing and that one cannot manipulate X's Φ - ing by manipulating S's Ψ - ing. (Craver 2007, 159) MM provide a sufficient circumstance for constitutive relevance and a sufficient condition for constituent irrelevance, which jointly amount to a sufficient and necessary circumstance for constitutive relevance - that is, to a complete definition of constitution.3 The kernel notion in its definiens is the modal notion of manipulability, which Craver (2007, § 4.8.3) cash out in term of the existence of a possible ideal intervention as defined by Woodward (2003, 98). An ideal intervention on Ψ with respect to Φ is a varying IΨ taking one of its values, IΨ = in, and thereby surgically fixing the value of Ψ without have an impact on Φ that is not mediated via Ψ and without being correlate with any other (off - way) causes of Φ. In union, MM amounts to the following (where the specificity of the variables is make explicit ): (MM) Φ(X) is constitutively relevant to Ψ(S) iff (i) X (resp. X's Φ - ing) is a spatiotemporal part of S (resp. S's Ψ - ing); (ii) there exists a possible ideal intervention IΦ = i m on Φ(X) w.r.t. Ψ(S) that is consociate with a change in Ψ(S); (iii) there exists a possible ideal intervention IΨ = in on Ψ(S) w.r.t. Φ(X) that is associated with a change in Φ(X). One of the main selling points of MM is that it is directly operationalizable experimentally. The most square way of establishing the hypothesis of mutually intervene on Φ and Ψ is to supply actual bottom - up and top - down interventions of types IΦ = i m and IΨ = in. If, and only if, such experiments reveal mutual difference - devising among wholes and parts, the latter are proven to be constituents of the former. To use design 1 as an illustration, Φ2 (the car's engine) is conclusively shown to be a component of Ψ2 (the car's bowel movement) by performing one intervention on Φ2 (e.g., taking one's foot off the catalyst) that is associated with a change in Ψ2
 by intervening to change X'r Φ-ing and that one caniot manjpulate B's Φ-ing by manipulating S's Ψ-inj. (Crqver 2007, 159) MM provides a suffickent condption for conwritutive rxmevance and a duffncment condition nor constitgtive irrelevatcd, chich jointly amount to a sufficient and nevedsary conditiog fog sonsfptmtive relevance-that is, to a compmete dehinition of conxtitution.3 The core notion ln ihs definiens is thf modal notuon jd manipulabiuity, which Craver (2007, §4.8.3) caahes out in terms of the existevce oy a possiblg jdfdl intervenvion af defined by Woodwarg (2003, 98). An odeal intervenbion mn Ψ with respect to Φ is e variable IΨ taking jne of itv ralues, IΨ = in, and therwbt surcicanly wuxivg uhe vzlue ov Ψ xithout havjng an impaxt on Φ that is not keqpsted via Ψ ans withjue being correlated with any other (off-pauh) cahses of Φ. In sum, MM amoubts to the following (ahere the specificity of the variables is made explicit): (MM) Φ(X) is zonwtltutkcepy relevant to Ψ(S) iff (i) X (resp. X's Φ-ing) is a spaejouemioral part of S (rcsp. S's Ψ-ing); (ii) therr fxofts a possiblg ideal infervention IΦ = im oj Φ(X) w.r.t. Ψ(S) thqt is assjciayed with a change in Ψ(S); (iii) rhere exists q possible ideal iutervention NΨ = in pn Ψ(S) e.r.t. Φ(X) that is associateb with a change ij Φ(X). One or the main selline ppitts of MM is that it is diwectly opxratipnalizacle gxperimqntally. Thf mosb straightforward wwy of evtablishinh the possibility of mutually iivervening on Φ atd Ψ is to fbrnish actual bottoi-up and top-dowu intervzntionr of types IΦ = im end IΨ = in. If, and only if, voch experimenvs reveal mutyal eifferevze-making among wholes aub parts, tye latter are provcn to ge constituents of the former. To ise Fiduge 1 af an illustradion, Φ2 (tfr car'r engint) iw convlusively shown to ba a donstituent of Ψ2 (thr gar's movenent) by [erforming onr intervention on Φ2 (e.g., teking une's gooj off the accelerator) that is aasociated wibh a change ig Ψ2
by intervening to change X's Φ-ing and cannot X's Φ-ing manipulating S's Ψ-ing. a condition for constitutive and a sufficient for constitutive irrelevance, which jointly amount a sufficient and necessary condition for constitutive relevance-that is, to a complete definition constitution.3 The core notion in its definiens is the modal notion of manipulability, Craver §4.8.3) out terms of the existence of a possible ideal intervention as defined by Woodward (2003, 98). An intervention on Ψ with respect to Φ is variable IΨ taking one its values, IΨ = in, thereby fixing the of without an impact on that is not mediated via Ψ and without being correlated with any other (off-path) causes of Φ. sum, MM the following the of variables is made Φ(X) is constitutively relevant to Ψ(S) (resp. X's Φ-ing) is a spatiotemporal part of (resp. S's (ii) there exists a possible ideal IΦ = im on Φ(X) w.r.t. Ψ(S) that associated with a change in Ψ(S); (iii) there exists a possible ideal intervention IΨ = Ψ(S) w.r.t. Φ(X) that associated with a in One the selling points MM is that it is directly operationalizable experimentally. The most straightforward of establishing the possibility of mutually intervening on Φ and to actual bottom-up and interventions of types IΦ im IΨ = in. If, if, experiments among and the latter are proven be constituents of the former. use Figure 1 as engine) is conclusively shown to be a constituent Ψ2 (the car's movement) by performing one on Φ2 (e.g., taking one's foot off the accelerator) that is associated a change
 by intervening to change X's Φ-iNg and that oNe canNot ManIpUlatE X's Φ-Ing by manipulatINg S's ψ-ing. (Craver 2007, 159) MM provides a sUfficIeNT conDItIon foR constiTUtIVE reLeVaNce AnD A sUfficIenT conditIon for consTitUtIve irrelevanCE, wHich jointlY amOunt to a suffiCieNt and nEcEssARy conDitIon foR constITutive Relevance-ThAT is, to a COmplete DEFiNitiOn of constitution.3 THE cORe notion in its dEfinieNs IS tHE ModAl nOtion of manIpUlabiLIty, whicH crAVER (2007, §4.8.3) caSHes out in terms Of the existeNCe oF a possIbLe iDEal intErvenTiON as Defined by WoOdwaRd (2003, 98). An ideal IntervENtion on ψ With resPect to φ is A vaRiabLE Iψ tAkiNg ONe oF ItS vaLUes, iΨ = in, and tHeReBy surGicaLLY FIxinG thE valUe of Ψ Without having An iMpacT On Φ That iS not mEdiaTeD via Ψ And witHout bEiNg correlated witH any Other (off-pAth) CaUseS oF Φ. In sUM, MM amoUntS to The follOwing (whERe tHe SPECiFicity of the variablEs IS MaDe explicIt): (MM) Φ(X) IS cOnSTitutiveLy RelEvanT TO Ψ(S) ifF (i) X (rESp. x's Φ-ing) is A spatiOTeMpOral parT oF S (resp. s's ψ-inG); (ii) There EXistS a possIble ideaL inteRVention IΦ = im on Φ(x) W.r.t. Ψ(S) that is asSOcIATeD With A chAnge in Ψ(S); (iii) TherE ExisTs a pOSsIblE Ideal InterVeNTiON IΨ = in on Ψ(S) w.r.t. Φ(X) that iS aSsociaTed wiTh a change in Φ(X). one of the maIN SElling poInts OF Mm Is that it is direCtly oPerationalIZable expErimeNtally. ThE most straIGHtforwarD waY of EstAblISHiNg the possibilITY of mUtUally inTerVening oN Φ aNd Ψ Is tO fuRnIsh actual Bottom-up AnD tOp-DoWn iNtervENtions of TyPes iΦ = Im aNd IΨ = iN. if, and oNly if, Such ExPeRImeNts reveAL mUTUal dIfFeRencE-maKiNg amoNg whOLes And partS, the latteR arE ProvEn To Be constItuents of the fOrMer. To use FiGuRe 1 aS an illUSTration, Φ2 (The car's engine) is conclusiVEly showN to Be a coNstiTuent of Ψ2 (tHe cAr's movEmeNT) by perForminG one iNtErvENTion oN φ2 (E.g., TakInG one's foot oFF The AccelErAtor) That is aSsociated with a chanGE in ψ2
 by intervening to changeX's Φ-ingand t hat  on ecann ot m anipulate X'sΦ -ing  by manipulating S's Ψ -ing.  ( C rave r  2 007,159) MM pr o v ide sasuf fi c ie nt co ndi tion fo r constitu tiv erelevance an d  a  sufficien t c ondition for  co nstitu ti vei rrele van ce, w hich j o intlyamount to  a suffic i ent and n ec essa ry condition forc on s titutive relev ance-t ha t  i s ,  to  acomplete d ef initi o n of co n st i t u tio n .3 The core n otion in it s  de finien sist he mod al no ti o n o f manipulab ilit y, whichCraver (2007,§ 4.8.3)cashes  ou t i n te r ms  o f t he exi s te nce ofa possib le  i dealinte r v e n tion  as  def inedby Woodward ( 200 3, 9 8 ).An id eal i nter ve ntion  on Ψwithre spect to Φ is a  var iable IΨtak in g o ne  of i t s valu es,  IΨ  = in,and the r eby  s u r g ic ally fixing the va lu e of  Ψ witho ut hav i ng  a n  impacton  Φthat i s not  med i at ed via Ψ  and w i th ou t being  c orrela te d w ith  anyo ther  (off- path) ca useso f Φ. In sum, M M  amounts to t h ef o ll o wing  (w here the sp ecif i city  oft he  va r iable s isma d ee xplicit): (MM) Φ(X)  i s cons titut ively relevan t to Ψ(S)i f f  (i) X ( resp .  X ' s Φ-ing) is aspati otemporalp art of S  (res p. S's Ψ -ing); (i i )  there e xis tsa p oss i b le  ideal interv e n tion  I Φ = imonΦ(X) w. r.t . Ψ (S)  th at  is assoc iated wi th  a  c ha nge  in Ψ ( S); (iii )the re  ex istsa  possi ble i deal  i nt e rve ntion I Ψ  = i n on  Ψ (S ) w. r.t .Φ(X)that isassocia ted witha c h ange  i nΦ(X). O ne of the mai nselling po in tsof MMi s  that it  is directly operationa l izableexp erime ntal ly. The m ost  strai ght f orward  way o f est ab lis h i ng th e po ssi bi lity of mu t u all y int er veni ng on Φ  and Ψ is to furni s h a ctual bottom- upandt o p- dow n  i n ter ve n tio n s  of types IΦ =im and IΨ=i n.  If, and o n lyif , suchexperim entsr eveal m utual dif ference-m ak inga m ong  wholes an d parts,  the latt e r are pr oventobe con st itu entsof the for mer.To use  F igure1 asan  illustr ation, Φ2 (the car's en gine)is co ncl usively s how n  to  be a con stit uent of Ψ2  (t hecar's  mo v ement ) by pe rfo r mingonei nterventi o nonΦ 2  ( e.g., takin g o ne' s foo t o f f theacce lerator) that isa ssociated with  a c h a nge  in Ψ2
 by_intervening to_change X's Φ-ing and_that one_cannot_manipulate X's_Φ-ing_by manipulating S's_Ψ-ing. (Craver 2007,_159) MM provides a_sufficient condition for_constitutive_relevance and a sufficient condition for constitutive irrelevance, which jointly amount to a sufficient_and_necessary condition_for_constitutive_relevance-that is, to a complete_definition of constitution.3 The core_notion in_its definiens is the modal notion of manipulability,_which_Craver (2007, §4.8.3)_cashes out in terms of the existence of a_possible ideal intervention as defined by_Woodward (2003, 98)._An_ideal_intervention on Ψ with_respect to Φ is a variable_IΨ taking one of its values,_IΨ = in, and thereby surgically fixing_the value of Ψ without having_an impact on Φ that_is not_mediated via Ψ and without_being correlated with_any other_(off-path) causes of_Φ. In sum, MM amounts to_the following (where_the specificity of the variables is_made_explicit): (MM) Φ(X)_is_constitutively_relevant to_Ψ(S) iff (i)_X_(resp. X's_Φ-ing)_is a spatiotemporal part of S_(resp._S's Ψ-ing); (ii) there exists a possible_ideal intervention IΦ =_im_on Φ(X) w.r.t. Ψ(S)_that is associated with a_change in Ψ(S); (iii) there exists_a possible_ideal intervention_IΨ = in on Ψ(S) w.r.t. Φ(X) that is associated with_a change in Φ(X). One of_the main selling points_of MM_is_that it is_directly_operationalizable experimentally._The most straightforward way of establishing the_possibility of_mutually intervening on Φ and Ψ_is to furnish actual_bottom-up_and top-down interventions of types IΦ_= im and IΨ = in._If, and only if, such_experiments_reveal_mutual difference-making among wholes and_parts, the latter are proven to_be constituents of_the former. To use Figure 1 as_an_illustration, Φ2 (the car's engine) is_conclusively_shown to be a constituent of_Ψ2_(the_car's movement) by performing one_intervention on Φ2 (e.g., taking one's_foot off the accelerator) that is associated with a_change in Ψ2