Hostname: page-component-76c49bb84f-7l7zb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-12T12:45:25.856Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functions and History: A Response to Garson

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2025

Brandon A. Conley Open the ORCID record for Brandon A. Conley [Opens in a new window]
Brandon A. Conley*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Washington & Lee University, Lexington, Virginia, USA
*
Email: bac248@cornell.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Justin Garson has argued, contrary to the claims of proponents of purportedly ahistorical theories of functions, that there are no ahistorical theories of functions. In the interest of satisfying uncontroversial desiderata on a theory of functions, the most influential ahistorical views all smuggle in history. I argue that Garson’s case relies on a misinterpretation of the ahistorical accounts he targets and that the details of the misinterpretation are instructive. They highlight often unquestioned assumptions about how a theory of functions fits into a broader account of scientific practice and what theoretical work a definition of function should do.

Information

Type
Discussion Note
Information
Philosophy of Science , First View , pp. 1 - 9
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bigelow, John, and Pargetter, Robert. 1987. “Functions.” Journal of Philosophy 84 (4):184–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/2027157.Google Scholar
Boorse, Christopher. 1975. “On the Distinction between Disease and Illness.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 5 (1):49–68.Google Scholar
Boorse, Christopher. 1977. “Health as a Theoretical Concept.” Philosophy of Science 44 (4):542–73. https://doi.org/10.1086/288768.Google Scholar
Boorse, Christopher. 2002. “A Rebuttal on Functions.” In Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of Psychology and Biology, edited by Ariew, André, Cummins, Robert, and Perlman, Mark, 63–112. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199255801.001.0001.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, Richard B. 1953. Scientific Explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Conley, Brandon A. 2023. “Dispositionalism and Dysfunction.” Philosophy of Science 90 (3):686–703. https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2023.30.Google Scholar
Craver, Carl F. 2001. “Role Functions, Mechanisms, and Hierarchy.” Philosophy of Science 68 (1):53–74. https://doi.org/10.1086/392866.Google Scholar
Cummins, Robert. 1975. “Functional Analysis.” Journal of Philosophy 72 (20):741–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/2024640.Google Scholar
Cummins, Robert. 2002. “Neo-Teleology.” In Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of Psychology and Biology, ed. Ariew, André, Cummins, Robert, and Perlman, Mark, 157–72. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199255801.001.0001.Google Scholar
Davies, Paul S. 2001. Norms of Nature: Naturalism and the Nature of Functions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5043.001.0001.Google Scholar
Garson, Justin. 2016. A Critical Overview of Biological Functions. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32020-5.Google Scholar
Garson, Justin. 2019. “There Are No Ahistorical Theories of Function.” Philosophy of Science 86 (5):1146–56. https://doi.org/10.1086/705472.Google Scholar
Hardcastle, Valerie G. 2002. “On the Normativity of Functions.” In Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of Psychology and Biology, edited by Ariew, André, Cummins, Robert, and Perlman, Mark, 144–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199255801.001.0001.Google Scholar
Mayr, Ernst. 1961. “Cause and Effect in Biology.” Science 134 (3489):1501–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.134.3489.1501.Google Scholar
Mossio, Matteo, Saborido, Cristian, and Moreno, Alvaro. 2009. “An Organizational Account of Biological Functions.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):813–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axp036.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. 1961. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Nanay, Bence. 2010. “A Modal Theory of Function.” Journal of Philosophy 107 (8):412–31. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2010107834.Google Scholar
Sommerhoff, Gerd. 1950. Analytical Biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar