C-type events

Since the narrow physical realizer of a C-type event is surely a part or constituent of that C-type event, then the reductive explanation of the regularity would not meet the definition of being undercutting for it would not entail that, in the case of every instance of the regularity not even a part or constituent of the C-type event token in each instance was a cause of the E-type event token in that instance. (2003, p. 160)... 

Also as concerns a mental event token and its narrow realizer (what we earlier called its core physical realizer ), he says If an Mi token is realized by a Pj-token, then the Pj-token just is part of the Mi-token (Melnyk, 2003, p. 137). He says nothing in defense of these claims. In fact, it is not the case that if an Mj token is realized by a Pj-token, then the Pj-token just is part of the Mj-token (p. 137). And it is not the case that the narrow realizer of a C-type event is surely a part or constituent of that C-type event (p. 160). The relation that the narrower physical realizer bears to the functional event — namely, the realization relation — is not a part-whole relation. It is, rather, the relation of role-occupancy. Narrow or core realizers are not parts or constituents of functional events. 

---