• Anjum, R.L., Mumford, S., Dispositional Modality (2011)
• Albantakis, L. Automata and Animats: From Dynamics to Cause–Effect Structures (2017)
• DeLanda, M., Emergence, Causality and Realism (2011)
• Farnsworth, K., Living through Downward Causation: From Molecules to Ecosystems (2017)
• Flack, Jessica, Life’s Information Theory (2017)
• Imari Walker, S. (ed), From Matter to Life – Information and Causality (2017) Part IV - Complexity and Causality
• llari, Phyllis; Russo, Federica, Information channels and biomarkers of disease (2016)
• Johansson, L.G., Causation, A Synthesis of Three Approaches (2007)
• Mumford, S. Causal Powers and Capacities (2010)
• Mumford, S., Lill Anjum, R., A Powerful Theory of Causation (2010)
• Mumford, S.; Lill Anjum, R, Getting Causes from Powers (2011)
• Stotz, K., Biological Information, Causality, and Specificity: An Intimate Relationship (2017)

“Lack of clarity about underlying philosophical commitments leads to lack of clarity at other levels of analysis. Here I show that the literature on so-called 'causal mechanisms' is rife with conceptual problems, stemming from insufficient rigor with respect to the metaphysics of causation”.
— Causal Mechanisms and the Philosophy of Causation, Ruth Groff

“Michael Strevens offers an account of causal explanation according to which explanatory practice is shaped by counterbalanced commitments to representing causal influence and abstracting away from overly specific details. In this paper, I challenge a key feature of that account. I argue that what Strevens calls explanatory frameworks figure prominently in explanatory practice because they actually improve explanations. This suggestion is simple but has far-reaching implications. It affects the status of explanations that cite multiply realizable properties; changes the explanatory role of causal factors with small effect; and undermines Strevens’ titular explanatory virtue, depth. This results in greater coherence with explanatory practice and accords with the emphasis that Strevens places on explanatory patterns. Ultimately, my suggestion preserves a tight connection between explanation and the creation of understanding by taking into account explanations’ role in communication”.
— Explanation and Understanding, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13194-010-0002-6

“dificultades lógicas siempre que intentamos definir el concepto de causalidad como un enunciado que afirma que existen leyes naturales” (Schlick 2002, p. 69).

• En el libro (comprado en eBook) From Matter to Life: Information and Causality, se busca explicar la emergencia de complejidad sin apelar a layes naturales, mediante la constructor theory (ver más adelante)
• En sentido contrario piensa Richard Swinburne, editor de Space, Time and Causality, que sugiere que la existencia de leyes naturales y el hecho de que de la aplicación de tales leyes surja la evolución hasta los seres humanos y la aparición de la consciencia, hace posible considerar la existencia de Dios como probable.

constructor_theory