The dynamical essence of powers

Abstract

Powers are properties defined by what they do. The focus of the large majority of the powers literature has been mainly put on explicating the (multifaceted) results of the production of a power in certain (multifaceted) initial conditions: but all this causal complexity is bound to be—and, in fact, it has proved to be—quite difficult to handle. In this paper we take a different approach by focusing on the very activity of producing those multifaceted manifestations themselves. In this paper, we propose an original account of what the essence of a power consists in which stems from a radical reconceptualisation of power-causation according to which counterfactuals are to be explained away by powers, and not vice-versa. We call this approach the dynamical operator account of powers. According to this account, the causal role of powers consists in their ensuring that the ontological transition from a stimulus S to a manifestation M happens. Powers thus have a dynamical essence which consists in the fundamental activity of generating the counterfactuals typically associated with them. We show that if one conceptualises this functional activity as the metaphysical fulcrum around which counterfactual-based causation revolves, one is granted not only an improved methodology to individuate powers but also a better understanding of their knowability, modality and directedness.

Dynamic all the way down

“…3 Mumford (2009), Mumford and Anjum (2011), Meincke (2020), Gozzano (2020), Roselli and Austin (2021).…”

“…It seems to us that the move is an ad hoc one, that does not cut much metaphysical ice. Roselli and Austin (2021) as well have argued for the dynamical character of powers, defending a renewed ontology. Taking steps from dispositions as multi-tracked, 5 Roselli and Austin underlie the importance of a unitary understanding of dispositions and in such a unified view, dispositions should not be conceived as caught by the collection of counterfactuals that are satisfied by them.…”

“…Rather, it is the intrinsic nature of dispositions that accounts for the truth of a number of counterfactuals. Powers should be considered as ‘functional mediators between input (stimulus factors) and output (manifestation states)’ (2021, p. 14965). Consequently, the ‘dynamical operator account’, as they call it, says that to be a power is to be the performer of a specific causal role, locating ‘the essence of a power not in what that power can do, but rather in how that power does what it can do’ (2021).…”

“…Powers should be considered as ‘functional mediators between input (stimulus factors) and output (manifestation states)’ (2021, p. 14965). Consequently, the ‘dynamical operator account’, as they call it, says that to be a power is to be the performer of a specific causal role, locating ‘the essence of a power not in what that power can do, but rather in how that power does what it can do’ (2021). However, this functional reading may well be endorsed by a perdurantist as well, by taking functions to be executed by step‐by‐step ‘static’ processes.…”