Skip Navigation


The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Advance Access originally published online on September 8, 2009
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2009 60(4):813-841; doi:10.1093/bjps/axp036
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
60/4/813    most recent
axp036v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mossio, M.
Right arrow Articles by Moreno, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2009). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for the Philosophy of Science. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

An Organizational Account of Biological Functions

Matteo Mossio

Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques CNRS/Université Paris1/ENS, 13 rue du Four, 75006 Paris, France Matteo.Mossio{at}ens.fr

Cristian Saborido and Alvaro Moreno

Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science, University of the Basque Country, Avenida de Tolosa 70, 20080, San Sebastian, Spain cristian.saborido{at}ehu.es alvaro.moreno{at}ehu.es


  Abstract

In this paper, we develop an organizational account that defines biological functions as causal relations subject to closure in living systems, interpreted as the most typical example of organizationally closed and differentiated self-maintaining systems. We argue that this account adequately grounds the teleological and normative dimensions of functions in the current organization of a system, insofar as it provides an explanation for the existence of the function bearer and, at the same time, identifies in a non-arbitrary way the norms that functions are supposed to obey. Accordingly, we suggest that the organizational account combines the etiological and dispositional perspectives in an integrated theoretical framework.

  1. Introduction
  2. Dispositional Approaches
  3. Etiological Theories
  4. Biological Self-maintenance
    4.1 Closure, teleology, and normativity
    4.2 Organizational differentiation

  5. Functions
    5.1 C1: Contributing to the maintenance of the organization
    5.2 C2: Producing the functional trait

  6. Implications and Objections
    6.1 Functional versus useful
    6.2 Dysfunctions, side effects, and accidental contributions
    6.3 Proper functions and selected effects
    6.4 Reproduction
    6.5 Relation with other ‘unitarian’ approaches

  7. Conclusions


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.