This paper takes up a recent challenge to mechanistic approaches to computational implementation (MAC), the view that computational implementation is best explicated within a mechanistic framework. The challenge, what has been labelled “the abstraction problem”, claims that one of MAC’s central pillars – medium independence – is deeply confused when applied to the question of computational implementation. The concern is that while it makes sense to say that computational processes are abstract (i.e. medium-independent), it makes considerably less sense to say that they are also concrete processes of a mechanism. After outlining the problem and its effect on MAC, I examine a recent response from Kuokkanen and Rusanen [2018. “Making Too Many Enemies: Hutto and Myin’s Attack on Computationalism.” Philosophical Explorations 21 (2): 282–294. doi:10.1080/13869795.2018.1477980]. I argue that Kuokkanen and Rusanen’s response comes up short insofar as it makes problematic trade-offs among various desiderata we have for a theory of implementation. This leads to a general dilemma for MAC: either give up being an objective theory of implementation or concede the abstraction problem and so reintroduce triviality concerns. In response, I argue that conceiving of computations as abstracta rather than illata provides a way to avoid the proposed dilemma and articulate a notion of medium independence that addresses the abstraction problem.

本文提出了对机械实现方法（MAC）的一种新的挑战，即在机械框架内最好地阐明计算实现的观点。这项被称为“抽象问题”的挑战声称，MAC的中心支柱之一（中等独立性）在应用于计算实现问题时深感困惑。值得关注的是，虽然它是有道理的说，计算过程是抽象的（即中等无关），这使得相当少的意义说，他们也是混凝土过程中的机制。在概述了问题及其对MAC的影响之后，我研究了Kuokkanen和Rusanen [2018。“制造太多敌人：Hutto和Myin对计算主义的攻击。”哲学探索21（2）：282–294。doi：10.1080 / 13869795.2018.1477980]。我认为，Kuokkanen和Rusanen的回应很短，因为这在我们对实施理论的各种渴望之间做出了有问题的取舍。这给MAC带来了一个普遍的困境：要么放弃成为一种客观的实现理论，要么承认抽象问题，从而重新引入琐碎的关注点。作为回应，我认为将计算构想为抽象而不是illata提供了一种方法，可以避免所提出的难题，并阐明解决抽象问题的中等独立性概念。