Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T13:13:11.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional Explanation in Biology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Hugh Lehman
Hugh Lehman*
Affiliation:
Western Washington State College
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the problem of giving a correct analysis of function statements as they are used in biology. Examples of such statements are (1) The function of the myelin sheath is to insulate the nerve fiber and (2) The function of chlorophyll is to enable photosynthesis to take place. After criticizing analyses of such statements developed by Braithwaite, Nagel and Hempel an analysis is presented by the author. Finally the question of whether function statements are explanations is discussed briefly.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 1965, pp. 1 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

[1] Beckner, M., The Biological Way of Thought. New York: Columbia University Press, 1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Braithwaite, R. B., Scientific Explanation. Torchbook edition: Harper and Brothers, 1960.Google Scholar
[3] Bonner, J., “Plant Hormones,” Frontiers in Science, ed. E. Hutchings, Jr. New York: Basic Books, 1958, p. 89.Google Scholar
[4] Cannon, W. B., The Wisdom of the Body. New York: W. W. Norton Company, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Cohen, Jonathan, “Teleological Explanation,” Aristotelian Society Proceedings, 1950-1951, pp. 255–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Hempel, Carl C., “The Logic of Functional Analysis,” in Symposium on Sociological Theory, ed. L. Gross. Evanston: Row Peterson Company, 1959.Google Scholar
[7] Huxley, Julian, Evolution the Modern Synthesis. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942.Google Scholar
[8] Kimber, D. C., Gray, C. E., Stackpole, C. E., and Leavell, L. C., Textbooy of Anatomy and Physiology. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1953.Google Scholar
[9] Lehman, Hugh, Function Statements in Biology. A thesis presented to the Department of Philosophy, Harvard University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, February 1963.Google Scholar
[10] Nagel, E., “Formalization of Functionalism,” Logic Without Metaphysics. Glencoe: The Free Press, 1956.Google Scholar
[11] Nagel, E., Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1961.10.1119/1.1937571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Nagel, E., “Teleological Explanation and Teleological Systems,” Readings in the Philosophy of Science, ed. H. Feigl and M. Brodbeck. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953.Google Scholar
[13] Scheffler, I., “Thoughts on Teleology,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. IX, No. 36., 1959.Google Scholar
[14] Sommerhoff, G., Analytical Biology. London: Oxford University Press, 1950.Google Scholar
[15] Woodger, J. H., Biological Principles, A Critical Study. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1929.Google Scholar