Biological Function, Adaptation, and Natural Design
- 1 December 1995
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Philosophy of Science
- Vol. 62 (4) , 609-622
- https://doi.org/10.1086/289889
Abstract
Recently something close to a consensus about the best way to naturalize the notion of biological function appears to be emerging. Nonetheless, teleological notions in biology remain controversial. In this paper we provide a naturalistic analysis for the notion of natural design. Many authors assume that natural design should be assimilated directly to function. Others find the notion problematic because it suggests that evolution is a directed process. We argue that both of these views are mistaken. Our naturalistic account does not simply equate design with function. We argue that the distinction between function and design is important for understanding the evolution of the physical and behavioral traits of organisms.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Modern History Theory of FunctionsNoûs, 1994
- Functional Analysis and Proper FunctionsThe British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 1993
- What is the function of encounter patterns in ant colonies?Animal Behaviour, 1993
- Evolution and progressTrends in Ecology & Evolution, 1993
- Social Play among Juvenile Bighorn Sheep: Structure, Development, and Relationship to Adult BehaviorEthology, 1993
- A mobility gradient in the organization of vertebrate movement: The perception of movement through symbolic languageBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1992
- Functions as Selected Effects: The Conceptual Analyst's DefensePhilosophy of Science, 1991
- Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The “Panglossian paradigm” defendedBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1983
- Function StatementsPhilosophy of Science, 1977
- Intentional SystemsThe Journal of Philosophy, 1971