Biological Teleology, Reductionism, and Verbal Disputes

Foundations of Science 26 (4):859-880 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The extensive philosophical discussions and analyses in recent decades of function-talk in biology have done much to clarify what biologists mean when they ascribe functions to traits, but the basic metaphysical question—is there genuine teleology and design in the natural world, or only the appearance of this?—has persisted, as recent work both defending, and attacking, teleology from a Darwinian perspective, attest. I argue that in the context of standard contemporary evolutionary theory, this is for the most part a verbal, rather than a substantive dispute: the disputants are talking past one another. To justify this claim I develop a general framework within which reductionist views, such as the standard ‘etiological’ account of biofunctions, occupy an intermediate position between what I call full-blooded realism and full-blooded anti-realism, and suggest that whether such views count as ‘realist’ views has no objective, theory-neutral answer.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,122

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Method of Verbal Dispute.Alan Sidelle - 2007 - Philosophical Topics 35 (1-2):83-113.
Verbal Disputes.David J. Chalmers - 2011 - Philosophical Review 120 (4):515-566.
Competing Ontologies and Verbal Disputes.Jakub Mácha - 2017 - Prolegomena : Časopis Za Filozofiju 16 (1):7-21.
Merely Verbal Disputes.C. S. I. Jenkins - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S1):11-30.
Is the Hirsch–Sider Dispute Merely Verbal?Gerald Marsh - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (3):459-469.
Two Species of Merely Verbal Disputes.Delia Belleri - 2018 - Metaphilosophy 49 (5):691-710.
Disagreement Lost.Martín Abreu Zavaleta - 2020 - Synthese (1-2):1-34.
Grene on Mechanism and Reductionism: More Than Just a Side Issue.Robert N. Brandon - 1984 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:345 - 353.
Kant's Biological Teleology and Its Philosophical Significance.Hannah Ginsborg - 2006 - In Graham Bird (ed.), A Companion to Kant. Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell. pp. 455–469.
Teleology and biocentrism.Sune Holm - 2017 - Synthese 194 (4).
Reductionism revisited.A. C. Scott - 2004 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (2):51-68.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-01-04

Downloads
33 (#439,340)

6 months
13 (#138,161)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Sandy C. Boucher
University of New England (Australia)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Otto Neurath.
Word and Object.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1960 - Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

View all 108 references / Add more references