 The determinism challenge can be raised as part of each of the three philosophical projects we distinguished: one might argue that our intuitive concept of cause is deterministic or that only a deterministic concept of cause could serve fulfil certain useful cognitive functions. But Norton’s dilemma that a causal constraint either has to place a constraint on all sciences—that is, is a universal constraint—or would amount to a mere honorific is perhaps most easily resisted within the functional project. As Woodward (2014) emphasizes, it is compatible with causal judgments playing an important cognitive role in some domains that there are limits to the scope of causal thinking and that causal concepts are not universally applicable. Thus, the usefulness of deterministic causal reasoning might be restricted to some contexts—contexts that may include some theoretical contexts in physics—while there may also be domains in physics in which deterministic causal notions are not applicable. Norton assumes that a constraint that is not universal is no constraint at all, but this assumption can be  denied.