Function attribution depends on the explanatory context: A Reply to Neander and Rosenberg's Reply to Nanay
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophy 109 (10):623-627 (2012)
In ‘A modal theory of function’, I gave an argument against all existing theories of function and outlined a new theory. Karen Neander and Alex Rosenberg argue against both my negative and my positive claim. My aim here is not merely to defend my account from their objections, but to (a) very briefly point out that the new account of etiological function they propose in response to my criticism cannot avoid the circularity worry either and, more importantly, to (b) highlight, and attempt to make precise, an important feature of my modal theory that may have been understated in the original paper – that function attributions depend on the explanatory project at hand.
|Keywords||Function Biological function Contextualism Modal theory of function|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Bence Nanay (2014). The Representationalism Versus Relationalism Debate: Explanatory Contextualism About Perception. European Journal of Philosophy 23 (1):321-336.
Bence Nanay (2014). Teleosemantics Without Etiology. Philosophy of Science 81 (5):798-810.
Bence Nanay (2013). Artifact Categorization and the Modal Theory of Artifact Function. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 4 (3):515-526.
Similar books and articles
Bence Nanay (2011). Function, Modality, Mental Content. Journal of Mind and Behavior 32 (2):84-87.
Bence Nanay (2010). A Modal Theory of Function. Journal of Philosophy 107 (8):412-431.
Osamu Kiritani (2011). Function and Modality. Journal of Mind and Behavior 32 (1):1-4.
D. M. Walsh (1996). Fitness and Function. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (4):553-574.
Osamu Kiritani (2011). Modality and Function: Reply to Nanay. Journal of Mind and Behavior 32 (2):89-90.
Berent Enc (1979). Function Attributions and Functional Explanations. Philosophy of Science 46 (3):343-365.
Beth Preston (1998). Why is a Wing Like a Spoon? A Pluralist Theory of Function. Journal of Philosophy 95 (5):215-254.
Arno G. Wouters (2003). Four Notions of Biological Function. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34 (4):633-668.
Mark Rowlands (1997). Teleological Semantics. Mind 106 (422):279-304.
Arno Wouters (2003). Four Notions of Biological Function. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 34 (4):633-668.
Richard J. Hall (1990). Does Representational Content Arise From Biological Function? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:193 - 199.
Melvin M. Sakurai (1980). A Competitive Test of the Descriptive Accuracy of the Characteristic Function, Power Function, and Shapley Value Based Function. Theory and Decision 12 (3):259-278.
Jeroen de Ridder (2006). The (Alleged) Inherent Normativity of Technological Explanations. Techne 10 (1):79-94.
Francisco J. Vázquez & Richard Watt (2002). The Price of Risk with Incomplete Knowledge on the Utility Function. Theory and Decision 53 (3):271-287.
Agustín Vicente (2012). Burge on Representation and Biological Function. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):125-133.
Added to index2012-11-30
Total downloads74 ( #45,843 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #50,975 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?