Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
I distinguish two forms of pluralism about biological functions, between-discipline pluralism and within-discipline pluralism. Between-discipline pluralism holds that different theories of function are appropriate for different subdisciplines of biology and psychology (for example, that the selected effects theory of function is appropriate for some branches of evolutionary biology, and the causal role theory is appropriate for disciplines such as molecular biology, neuroscience, or psychology). I provide reasons for rejecting this view. Instead, I recommend within-discipline pluralism, which emphasizes the plurality of function concepts at play within any given subdiscipline of biology and psychology. 1 Introduction2 Different Disciplines, Different Functions3 Two Arguments for Between-Discipline Pluralism4 Two Objections against the Arguments for Between-Discipline Pluralism5 A Survey of Function-Bestowing Selection Processes6 Conclusion
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Justin Garson (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: