David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The concept of technical function is a key concept to describe technical artifacts and artifacts-to-be-designed. Engineers often give such descriptions in terms of functional decomposition models, which represent relationships between functions and sets of other (sub) functions. Despite the importance of the concept of function there is no consensus among engineers about its meaning. Models of functional decomposition are likewise conceptually divergent. Although this conceptual diversity hampers information exchange between engineers, they accept and maintain it. Engineers do not, by and large, engage in a focused debate to establish commonly shared functional conceptualizations. This contrasts with science where both debates on the adequacy of key conceptualizations and convergence toward shared conceptualizations are common. This book investigates the side-by-side usage of different functional decomposition models in engineering. It explains this phenomenon by applying and extending the analysis of theory choice in terms of methodological incommensurability to engineering functional decomposition, rather than to science. This analysis shows that engineers’ usage of competing functional decomposition models is rational from a practical point of view. This book furthermore investigates the communication problems that the side-by-side usage of different models engenders and presents a strategy that supports the exchange and re-use of functional information between engineers.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dingmar van Eck (2011). Incommensurability and Rationality in Engineering Design. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 15 (2):118-136.
Carl Mitcham (1998). The Importance of Philosophy to Engineering. Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 17 (3):27-47.
Alan Levin (2010). A Top-Down Approach to a Complex Natural System: Protein Folding. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 20 (4):423-437.
Charles Rathkopf (2013). Localization and Intrinsic Function. Philosophy of Science 80 (1):1-21.
Colleen Murphy, Paolo Gardoni & Charles Harris (2011). Classification and Moral Evaluation of Uncertainties in Engineering Modeling. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):553-570.
Jesse Hughes (2009). An Artifact is to Use: An Introduction to Instrumental Functions. [REVIEW] Synthese 168 (1):179 - 199.
Michael Davis (1997). Better Communication Between Engineers and Managers. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (2):171-212.
Jakob Hohwy (2007). Functional Integration and the Mind. Synthese 159 (3):315-328.
Predrag Sustar (2007). Neo‐Functional Analysis: Phylogenetical Restrictions on Causal Role Functions. Philosophy of Science 74 (5):601-615.
Peter McLaughlin (2001). What Functions Explain: Functional Explanation and Self-Reproducing Systems. Cambridge University Press.
José Iovino (1997). Definability in Functional Analysis. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (2):493-505.
Marvin B. Scott (1966). Functional Foibles and the Analysis of Social Change. Inquiry 9 (1-4):205 – 214.
Josep M. Basart & Montse Serra (2013). Engineering Ethics Beyond Engineers' Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):179-187.
Added to index2011-03-12
Total downloads11 ( #290,530 of 1,789,832 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #420,676 of 1,789,832 )
How can I increase my downloads?