Minds and Machines 11 (2):239-256 (2001)
|Abstract||Some evolutionary psychologists contend that the best way to discover the functions of our present psychological systems is by appealing to the notion of functional mesh, that is, the assumed tight fit between a trait's design and the adaptive problem it is supposed to solve. In this paper, I argue that there exist theoretical considerations and empirical evidence that undermine this assumption of optimal design. Instead, I suggest that cognitive systems are constrained by what I call bounded functionality. This proposal makes use of Jacob's (1977) notion of evolution as a bricoleur and Simon's (1981) idea that problems can have ``satisficing'' solutions. Functional mesh will thus be shown to neglect constraints that are necessary to explain the evolution of psychological mechanisms|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Similar books and articles
Shu-Chen Li & Ulman Lindenberger (2002). Coconstructed Functionality Instead of Functional Normality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):761-762.
Gerhard Schlosser (1998). Self-Re-Production and Functionality. Synthese 116 (3):303-354.
John Collier, Autonomy in Anticipatory Systems: Significance for Functionality, Intentionality and Meaning.
Claudia Lorena García (2010). Functional Homology and Functional Variation in Evolutionary Cognitive Science. Biological Theory 5 (2).
Arno G. Wouters (2007). Design Explanation: Determining the Constraints on What Can Be Alive. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 67 (1):65-80.
Paul Sheldon Davies (1996). Discovering the Functional Mesh: On the Methods of Evolutionary Psychology. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 6 (4):559-585.
João Marcos (2009). What is a Non-Truth-Functional Logic? Studia Logica 92 (2):215 - 240.
Pawel Garbacz (2007). A First Order Theory of Functional Parthood. Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (3):309 - 337.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #131,640 of 722,771 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?