Transference theory of causation

There is another way that oomph factors have been invoked in accounts of causation, a way that is entirely independent of the idea of whether there is a sui generis kind of nomic necessity. Such factors are invoked in transference theories of causation, according to which causation involves the transfer of some preserved quantity. Kim (1998b, 2007) makes it clear that he favors a kind of transference theory of causation. Wesley Salmon (1984, 1994), whom Kim cites with approval, held a transference theory according to which causation involves the transference of some kind of conserved quantity or other, energy (or mass energy), or momentum. Kim, however, he does not commit himself to any specific transference theory." ... 

Still, little, if any, dialectical traction is to be gained here by appealing to a transference theory of causation to argue that functional events are not causes. For NRP theorists reject transference theories. Moreover, it is, of course, highly controversial whether there is any viable transference theory of causation, even independently of the issue of functional event causation. (For the record, I myself would not defend a transference theory of causation.)... 

Nor is the issue that separates them whether causation analytically requires such oomph factors. Kim does not maintain that causation analytically requires transference. Nomic subsumption and counterfactual theories of causation are offered as analyses of our concept of causation, as statements of noncircular conditions that are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for causation. In contrast, transference theorists typically do not purport to be offering that kind of conceptual analysis. That causation does not analytically require such oomph factors is common ground between Kim and Loewer. 

I think, however, that we need not despair of resolving the issue, though I don t expect to resolve it here. 1 think that the issue can be adequately addressed without settling the matter of what, exactly, causation is. The leading theories of causation are nomic subsumption theories, counter-factual theories, and transference theories. " Let us set aside transference theories and also nomic subsumption theories according to which laws involve a kind oisuigeneris nomic necessity. Let us focus on only regularity and counterfactual theories - non-oomph theories - and avoid any appeal to the idea of causal work. ... 

---