Garson, Justin (2018) There Are No Ahistorical Theories of Function. In: UNSPECIFIED.

Preview

Text Garson_Forthcoming_There_Are_No_Ahistorical_Theories_Of_Function.pdf Download (154kB) | Preview

Abstract

Theories of function are conventionally divided up into historical and ahistorical ones. Proponents of ahistorical theories often cite the ahistoricity of their accounts as a major virtue. Here, I argue that none of the mainstream “ahistorical” accounts are actually ahistorical. All of them embed, implicitly or explicitly, an appeal to history. In Boorse’s goal-contribution account, history is latent in the idea of statistical-typicality. In the propensity theory, history is implicit in the idea of a species’ natural habitat. In the causal role theory, history is required for making sense of dysfunction. I elaborate some consequences for the functions debate.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Conference or Workshop Item (UNSPECIFIED)
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Garson, Justin jgarson@hunter.cuny.edu 0000-0002-0210-2989
Keywords:	Philosophy of biology; biological function; selected effects; causal role; fitness contribution
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Biology > Evolutionary Theory Specific Sciences > Biology > Function/Teleology
Depositing User:	Dr. Justin Garson
Date Deposited:	24 Jan 2019 17:07
Last Modified:	24 Jan 2019 17:07
Item ID:	15657
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Biology > Evolutionary Theory Specific Sciences > Biology > Function/Teleology
Date:	3 July 2018
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/15657

Available Versions of this Item

• There Are No Ahistorical Theories of Function. (deposited 13 Nov 2018 00:27)
  • There Are No Ahistorical Theories of Function. (deposited 24 Jan 2019 17:07) [Currently Displayed]

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item