Physicality is hardly a useful way to rebut a metaphor. When I have a nail I can;t push into the wood with my fingers, I use a physical tool. When I have a behavioral choice that I can't suss out using game theory (because I don't know the pay-offs as the consequences of my decision ripple away, I use the tool of morality. Tools is tools.

Where "causal power" fits into this isn't clear to me. Certainly whether I have a hammer will affect my decision to do something that requires a hammer. So, in that sense, having a hammer is "causal." and in that sense having a moral principle will cause me to behave differently from how I would behave if I didn't have it. But the tool is still just a tool. The good news is that having that tool enables me to do more, and so "causes" me to do more.

I know you can't address everything every conservative has ever said. But that's actually an admission that your project of debunking certain conservatives isn't going to get you where I suspect you want to end up, viz., debunking conservatism.

Do you think the guys you list in you final paragraph agree on what "conservatism" means. Clearly, there's some overlap - as I recall from reading Kirk years ago, he has a chapter on Burke - but Will and "Trumpism?" Very different ends of the elephant. I assume your final sentence is ironic. Maybe I have led the wrong end of the horse to the water...