Mechanism-as-activity and the threat of polygenic effects

Summary, in English

Polygenic effects have more than one cause. They testify to the fact that several causal contributors are sometimes simultaneously involved in causation. The importance of polygenic causation was noticed early on by Mill (1893). It has since been shown to be a problem for causal-law approaches to causation and accounts of causation cast in terms of capacities. However, polygenic causation needs to be examined more thoroughly in the emerging literature on causal mechanisms. In this paper I examine whether an influential theory of mechanisms proposed by Peter Machamer, Lindley Darden and Carl Craver can accommodate polygenic effects and other forms of causal interaction. This theory is problematic, I will argue, because it ascribes a central role to activities. In it, activities are needed not only to constitute mechanisms but also to perform the causal role of mechanisms. Any such mechanism-as-activity will be incompatible with causal situations where either no or merely another kind of activity occurs. But, as I will try to illustrate in this paper, both kinds of situation may be frequent. If I am right, the view that Machamer and colleagues suggest leads to an impoverished conception of mechanism.

• Author: Johannes Persson
• Department/s: Theoretical Philosophy
• Publishing year: 2007
• Language: English
• Publication/Series: EPSA07: 1st Conference of the European Philosophy of Science Association (Madrid, 15-17 November, 2007).
• Links: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00003679/
• Document type: Conference paper
• Publisher: Phil Sci Archive
• Topic: Philosophy
• Keywords: activities; Machamer; causation; mechanism; explanation
• Conference name: EPSA 07
• Conference date: 2007-11-15
• Status: Published