Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T13:18:10.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functions as Selected Effects: The Conceptual Analyst's Defense

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Karen Neander
Karen Neander*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper I defend an etiological theory of biological functions (according to which the proper function of a trait is the effect for which it was selected by natural selection) against three objections which have been influential. I argue, contrary to Millikan, that it is wrong to base our defense of the theory on a rejection of conceptual analysis, for conceptual analysis does have an important role in philosophy of science. I also argue that biology requires a normative notion of a “proper function”, and that a normative notion is not ahistorical.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 168 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 The Philosophy of Science Association

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

Footnotes

†

I am grateful to many people for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper, especially Paul Griffiths, William Lycan, Ruth Millikan, Robert Pargetter, Huw Price, Elliott Sober, and Kim Sterelny.

References

Beckner, M. (1959), The Biological Way of Thought. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, J. and Pargetter, R. (1987), “Functions”, The Journal of Philosophy 84: 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorse, C. (1976), “Wright on Functions”, The Philosophical Review 85: 70–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, R. (1975), “Functional Analysis”, The Journal of Philosophy 72: 741–765. [Excerpt Reprinted in N. Block (ed.), (1980), Readings in Philosophy of Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 185–190.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, D. (1986), Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology. Fourth Printing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Millikan, R. G. (1984), Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories: New Foundations for Realism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Millikan, R. G. (1989), “In Defense of Proper Functions”, Philosophy of Science 56: 288–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minsky, M. (1974), “A Framework for Representing Knowledge”. Cambridge, MA: MIT AI Lab Memo 306. [Excerpts Reprinted in P. Winston (ed.), (1975), The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 211–277; other excerpts reprinted in J. Haugeland (ed.), (1981), Mind Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 95–128.]Google Scholar
Nagel, E. (1977), “Teleology Revisited”, The Journal of Philosophy 84: 261–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neander, K. (1983), “Abnormal Psychobiology”. Ph.D. Dissertation, La Trobe University.Google Scholar
Neander, K. (1988), “Discussion: What Does Natural Selection Explain? Correction to Sober”, Philosophy of Science 55: 422–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neander, K. (forthcoming), “The Teleological Notion of ‘Function‘”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1973), “Natural Categories”, Cognitive Psychology 4: 328–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1975), “Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories”, Journal of Experimental Psychology 104: 192–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, E. (1984), The Nature of Selection: Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sober, E. (1985), “Panglossian Functionalism and the Philosophy of Mind”, Synthese 64: 165–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W. (1972), “Teleology and the Logical Structure of Function Statements”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 3: 1–80.Google Scholar
Wright, L. (1973), “Functions”, The Philosophical Review 82: 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, L. (1976), Teleological Explanations: An Etiological Analysis of Goals and Functions. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar