Biological Function
Primary Contributors: Samuel Cusimano, Beckett Sterner
Editors: Beckett Sterner
Primary Contributors: Samuel Cusimano, Beckett Sterner
Editors: Beckett Sterner
There are multiple cross-cutting perspectives on how to organize existing philosophical definitions of biological function. The most common is a definition-based approach. For example, one can group definitions based on whether they treat function as depending only on the way an object is at some point in time or whether that object’s history also matters. While useful at a summary level, this basic typology doesn’t perfectly describe the detailed similarities and differences among definitions, and other cross-cutting typologies have been proposed. A second approach is aims-based and groups definitions in terms of what one can do with them.
Bunge 2000
Walsh and Ariew 1996
Perlman 2004
Cummin’s functions based on types of parts
Etiological
Organizational
Relational
Propensity
Biostatistical
Goal-directed
Persistence
Wright’s account
Example: small rock holding up large one in stream (PGS consensus without unity)
Propensity
organizational
Fixation in population
Evolutionary
Average rate of change (c.f. Expectation of future increase)
Propensity
System capacity
Causal role and organizational functions