Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Critical Overview of Biological FunctionsConclusion: What Next?

A Critical Overview of Biological Functions: Conclusion: What Next? [This chapter begins by showing why one standard way of describing the functions debate—as a debate between the selected effects theory, fitness-contribution theory, and causal role theory—is misguided. I then summarize three main conclusions. First, I argue that, to the extent that function statements are causal explanations, there are no current, viable alternatives to the selected effects theory. Second, I argue that, to the extent that we accept pluralism, we should not accept what I call (in Chap. 5) “between-discipline pluralism,” which seeks to restrict the applicability of the selected effects theory to some branches of evolutionary biology. Third, I advocate a specific version of the selected effects theory, the generalized selected effects theory, which I described earlier (in Chap. 3). In closing, I outline three outstanding problems for most theories of function. The first is function indeterminacy. Typically, there are a number of different activities associated with the performance of a function and most theories of function do not have the resources to specify which of those activities, precisely, constitutes an item’s function. Second, in many cases, a trait not only has a function, but it has an appropriate rate of functioning. For example, the heart not only has the function of beating, but it has the function of beating at a certain rate. How should we specify the appropriate rate of function? Third, for many traits that have functions, we can distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate situations for the performance of those functions. How should we modify our theories to take this into account?] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

A Critical Overview of Biological FunctionsConclusion: What Next?

Download PDF
4 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/a-critical-overview-of-biological-functions-conclusion-what-next-pRMFskCD20

References (14)

Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2016
ISBN
978-3-319-32018-2
Pages
109 –113
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-32020-5_7
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[This chapter begins by showing why one standard way of describing the functions debate—as a debate between the selected effects theory, fitness-contribution theory, and causal role theory—is misguided. I then summarize three main conclusions. First, I argue that, to the extent that function statements are causal explanations, there are no current, viable alternatives to the selected effects theory. Second, I argue that, to the extent that we accept pluralism, we should not accept what I call (in Chap. 5) “between-discipline pluralism,” which seeks to restrict the applicability of the selected effects theory to some branches of evolutionary biology. Third, I advocate a specific version of the selected effects theory, the generalized selected effects theory, which I described earlier (in Chap. 3). In closing, I outline three outstanding problems for most theories of function. The first is function indeterminacy. Typically, there are a number of different activities associated with the performance of a function and most theories of function do not have the resources to specify which of those activities, precisely, constitutes an item’s function. Second, in many cases, a trait not only has a function, but it has an appropriate rate of functioning. For example, the heart not only has the function of beating, but it has the function of beating at a certain rate. How should we specify the appropriate rate of function? Third, for many traits that have functions, we can distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate situations for the performance of those functions. How should we modify our theories to take this into account?]

Published: Mar 31, 2016

Keywords: Function pluralism; Situation-specificity; Response functions; Rate of functioning; Function indeterminacy

There are no references for this article.