This paper intends to critically consider the idea put forward by Johan Gamper (Philosophia 45: 631–636, 2017) that the principle of causal closure can be reconciled with the possibility of pluralism. This idea is based on redefining causal closure and on the introduction of so-called interfaces between the universes. By reconstructing and analyzing the author's argumentative steps, we will try to show that this approach is methodologically and explanatory unfounded. Firstly, this way of redefining the principle of causal closure is inconsistent with the very reasons why this principle was introduced. Secondly, the proposed view does not bring the explanatory benefits it promises, that is, it cannot solve difficulties such as the problem of the first cause. Moreover, the position itself produces many additional concerns and perplexities that remain unresolved. The conclusion of our analysis is that certain aspects of the proposed position may be sustainable and plausible, but only if novel arguments should be offered.

本文旨在批判性地考虑Johan Gamper（Philosophia 45：631–636，2017）提出的因果封闭原则可以与多元主义可能性相协调的想法。这个想法是基于重新定义因果关系的闭合，以及基于宇宙之间所谓接口的引入。通过重构和分析作者的论证步骤，我们将试图证明这种方法在方法论和解释上是没有根据的。首先，这种重新定义因果闭合原理的方法与引入该原理的原因是矛盾的。其次，所提出的观点并没有带来它所承诺的解释性好处，也就是说，它不能解决诸如第一个原因的问题之类的困难。而且，该职位本身会产生许多尚未解决的其他问题和困惑。我们的分析结论是，拟议职位的某些方面可能是可持续的和合理的，但前提是应提出新颖的论据。