The bit that caught my attention was how the mental state screens off its physical base once robustness is established - I’ve been thinking about that as a kind of *fungibility*, where what matters is the shape of the correlation, not the substrate.
I’ve been working on a four-fold distinction between different causal verbs - “because,” “causes,” “caused,” and “emerges” - each reflecting a different logical structure of sufficiency (like One→Many, Many→One, etc.). It builds on Searle’s subjectivity/objectivity framework but reframes it in terms of how explanations behave rather than what they refer to. If that sounds up your alley, I’ve sketched it in a post https://open.substack.com/pub/arithmeticbuddha/p/the-four-verbs-of-causation?r=4bks72&utm_medium=ios
The bit that caught my attention was how the mental state screens off its physical base once robustness is established - I’ve been thinking about that as a kind of *fungibility*, where what matters is the shape of the correlation, not the substrate.
I’ve been working on a four-fold distinction between different causal verbs - “because,” “causes,” “caused,” and “emerges” - each reflecting a different logical structure of sufficiency (like One→Many, Many→One, etc.). It builds on Searle’s subjectivity/objectivity framework but reframes it in terms of how explanations behave rather than what they refer to. If that sounds up your alley, I’ve sketched it in a post https://open.substack.com/pub/arithmeticbuddha/p/the-four-verbs-of-causation?r=4bks72&utm_medium=ios