In the debate on causal explanation in biology, in the past two decades largely influenced by the new mechanist (NM) approach, the concept of a pathway has recently reemerged as a promising research agenda (see, in particular, Ross Philosophy of Science, 85(4), 551-572, 2018; The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 72(1), 131-158, 2021). Ross’ account of biological explanation differentiates several autonomous types of causal structures that play explanatory and other roles across the life sciences. NM, however, prioritizes mechanisms as vehicles of biological explanations. According to this program, the causal architecture of biological pathways and other causal structures, such as cascades and processes, can be interpreted with at least one of the NM’s mechanism concepts. In other words, these alternative causal structures are not sufficiently distinctive to merit the explanatory autonomy with regard to the NM corresponding concepts. We examine the explanatory practice of molecular biology and concur with Ross that there are indeed distinct types of causal structures, not all falling under the concept of a mechanism. Nonetheless, we show that the concept of mechanism is referring to a privileged causal structure, at the center of explanatory efforts in molecular biology. Pathways and other causal concepts, while somewhat distinct from mechanisms themselves, are explanatorily relevant to the degree in which they exhibit mechanistic features, are parts of a mechanistic architecture, or may lead to a mechanistic arrangement. What emerges in that manner is a hierarchy of causal structures with mechanisms at the explanatory top, and lower levels differing in the degree in which they contribute to mechanistic arrangements.

在生物学因果解释的辩论中，在过去的二十年中，很大程度上受到新机制 (NM) 方法的影响，通路的概念最近重新成为一个有前途的研究议程（特别是参见罗斯科学哲学， 85 (4), 551-572, 2018；英国科学哲学杂志， 72(1), 131-158, 2021)。罗斯对生物学解释的解释区分了几种自主类型的因果结构，它们在整个生命科学中发挥着解释和其他作用。然而，NM 将机制作为生物学解释的载体。根据这个程序，生物通路的因果结构和其他因果结构，例如级联和过程，可以用至少一个 NM 的机制概念来解释。换句话说，这些替代的因果结构不够独特，不值得对 NM 相应概念的解释自主权。我们研究了分子生物学的解释性实践，并同意罗斯的观点，即确实存在不同类型的因果结构，并非都属于机制概念。尽管如此，我们表明机制的概念指的是一种特殊的因果结构，它是分子生物学解释工作的中心。路径和其他因果概念虽然与机制本身有些不同，但在解释上与它们表现出机械特征的程度相关，是机械架构的一部分，或者可能导致机械安排。以这种方式出现的是因果结构的层次结构，在解释的顶部有机制，较低的层次在它们对机械安排的贡献程度上有所不同。与它们展示机械特征的程度、是机械架构的一部分或可能导致机械安排的程度具有解释性相关性。以这种方式出现的是因果结构的层次结构，在解释的顶部有机制，较低的层次在它们对机械安排的贡献程度方面有所不同。与它们展示机械特征的程度、是机械架构的一部分或可能导致机械安排的程度具有解释性相关性。以这种方式出现的是因果结构的层次结构，在解释的顶部有机制，较低的层次在它们对机械安排的贡献程度上有所不同。