The Limits of Mechanical Causality

In #65 of the Critique of Judgment, Kant proposes that better classifications of 'Efficient' Causality and 'Teleological' Causality are "real" and "ideal", respectively, Causality.  Presupposed in his suggestion is the acceptance of the concept of Mechanical Causality, established in the 1st Critique, as 'real', with respect to which the Causality that is the central topic of the 3rd Critique, like that which is the central topic of the 2nd Critique, i. e. 'free' Causality', is a variation.  However, the same material could be presented as part of another 'critique', namely, a critique of the concept of Mechanical Causality, i. e. a demonstration of the inadequacy of the latter to explain either Rational conduct or Organisms.  As Kant acknowledges, the concept of Crystallization, like that of his earlier 'Nebular Hypothesis', in which a definite concrete formation emerges at the end of a natural process, pushes mechanistic explanation to its limit.  But, a third isomorphic example breaks that limit, and exposes a more fundamental limitation of Mechanical Causality.  That process is Gestation, in which, according to Mechanical Causality, 'the birth of a baby is a cause of gestation' is not an objectively valid proposition.  Instead, given that it is objectively valid, not only is Mechanical Causality  inadequate to it, but the implicit Atomism of that structure, i. e. that Cause and Effect are distinct events, not different moments of the same process, is exposed.