Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:37:12.539Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Functional Explanation in Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Abstract

The claim that a functional kind is multiply realized is typically motivated by appeal to intuitive examples. We are seldom told explicitly what the relevant structures are, and people have often preferred to rely on general intuitions in these cases. This article deals with the problem by explaining how to understand the proper relation between structural kinds and the functions they realize. I will suggest that the structural kinds that realize a function can be properly identified by attending to the context of functional explanation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank Kenneth Aizawa, Bernie Berofsky, John Bickle, Carl Gillett, Philip Kitcher, John Sisko, and an anonymous referee.

References

Bechtel, William, and Mundale, Jennifer (1999), “Multiple Realizability Revisited”, Multiple Realizability Revisited 66:175207.Google Scholar
Bickle, John (2003), Philosophy and Neuroscience: A Ruthlessly Reductive Account. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, Ned ([1978] 1980), “Troubles with Functionalism”, in Block, Ned (ed.), Readings in Philosophy of Psychology, Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 268305.Google Scholar
Block, Ned (1997), “Anti-reductionism Slaps Back”, Anti-reductionism Slaps Back 11:107132.Google Scholar
Block, Ned, and Fodor, Jerry ([1972] 1980), “What Psychological States Are Not”, in Block, Ned (ed.), Readings in Philosophy of Psychology, Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 237250.Google Scholar
Bock, Walter, and Wahlert, Gerd von ([1965] 1998), “Adaptation and the Form-Function Complex”, in Allen, Colin, Bekoff, Marc, and Lauder, George (eds.), Nature's Purposes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 117167.Google Scholar
Couch, Mark (2004), “Discussion: A Defense of Bechtel and Mundale”, Discussion: A Defense of Bechtel and Mundale 71:198204.Google Scholar
Cummins, Robert ([1975] 1998), “Functional Analysis”, in Allen, Colin, Bekoff, Marc, and Lauder, George (eds.), Nature's Purposes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 169196.Google Scholar
Endicott, Ronald (1989), “On Physical Multiple Realization”, On Physical Multiple Realization 70:212224.Google Scholar
Heil, John (2003), From an Ontological Point of View. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, Terence (1993), “Nonreductive Materialism and the Explanatory Autonomy of Psychology”, in Wagner, Steven J. and Warner, Richard (eds.), Naturalism: A Critical Appraisal. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 295320.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon (1984), “Concepts of Supervenience”, Concepts of Supervenience 45:153176.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon (1992), “Multiple Realization and the Metaphysics of Reduction”, Multiple Realization and the Metaphysics of Reduction 52:126.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon (1998), Mind in a Physical World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackie, J. L. (1965), “Causes and Conditions”, Causes and Conditions 2:245264.Google Scholar
Polger, Thomas W. (2004), Natural Minds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Lawrence A. (2000), “Multiple Realizations”, Multiple Realizations 97:635654.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Lawrence A. (2004), The Mind Incarnate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wolken, Jerome J. (1995), Light Detectors, Photoreceptors, and Imaging Systems in Nature. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wulff, Verner J. (1992), “Photoreception”, in McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, 7th ed., vol. 13. New York: McGraw-Hill, 446451.Google Scholar