I explore the prospects of a causal explanation of constitution, persistence, and emergence. I will suggest that the idea that causation involves the mutual manifestation of disposition partners allows us to think of compound entities as mutual manifestations of dynamic interactions between the parts that constitute them, and their persistence as a result of that dynamic interaction. However, I think we need to modify the conception of mutual manifestations. The mutuality has been described in terms of the equal importance of so-called disposition partners—pairs of active and passive powers—while the interaction between the objects that wield such powers is characterised as unidirectional; one object acts while the other receives the influence of the action. This view is challenged by the fact that the natural sciences do not recognise any form of unidirectional action. Instead they depict all interactions as perfectly reciprocal, in the sense that whenever one object exerts an influence, the other simultaneously exerts a proportional influence of the same kind on the first, but in the opposite direction. I suggest that to accept the reciprocity of interactions only strengthens the viability of a causal account of constitution, persistence, and emergence.