Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Kairos. Journal of Philosophy & Science

3 Issues per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
1647-659X
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Pluralism, Pragmatism and Functional Explanations

Jamie Shaw
Published Online: 2016-04-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kjps-2016-0001

Abstract

While many philosophers speak of ‘pluralism’ within philosophy of biology, there has been little said about what such pluralism amounts to or what its underlying assumptions are. This has provoked so me anxiety about whether pluralism is compatible with their commitment to naturalism (Cussins 1992). This paper surveys three prominent pluralist positions (Sandra Mitchell and Michael Dietrich’s (2006) ‘integrative pluralism’, and both Peter Godfrey-Smith’s (1993) and Beth Preston’s (1998) pluralist analyses of functional explanations in evolutionary biology) and demonstrates how all three are committed to a form of pragmatism. This analysis both clarifies the justification and grounding of pluralism and allows these pluralisms to avoid the criticisms of Cussins. I close by making some more general points about pluralism and its relationship to history and integration.

Keywords: pluralism; philosophy of biology; pragmatism; naturalism; functional explanations

References

  • Boorse, C., 1976, Wright on Functions, Philosophical Review, 70-86.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Carnap, R., 1938, Logical Foundations of the Unity of Science, in International Encyclopaedia of Unified Science, 393-404, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar

  • Cartwright, N., 1994, Fundamentalism vs. the Patchwork of Laws, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 279-92.Google Scholar

  • Cartwright, N., 1999, The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Cussins, A., 1992, The Limitations of Pluralism, in D. C. Lennon, Reduction, Explanation and Realism, 179-223, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Dietrich, M. & Mitchell, S., 2006, Integration without Unification: An Argument for Pluralism in the Biological Sciences, The American Naturalist, S73-S79.Google Scholar

  • Dupré, J., 1993, The Disorder of Things, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Fehr, C., 2006, Explanations of the Evolution of Sex: A Plurality of Local Mechanisms, in S. Kellert, H. Longino, & K. Waters, Scientific Pluralism, 167-190, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar

  • Feyerabend, P., 1975, Against Method, Verso Books, London.Google Scholar

  • Giere, R., 2006, Modest Evolutionary Naturalism, Biological Theory, 52-60.Google Scholar

  • Godfrey-Smith, P., 1993, Functions: Consensus Without Unity, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 196-208.Google Scholar

  • Godfrey-Smith, P., 2003, Theory and Reality, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar

  • Griffiths, P. E., 1993, Functional Analysis & Proper Functions, British Journal for Philosophy of Science, 403-422.Google Scholar

  • Kellert et al., 2006, The Pluralist Stance, in S. Kellert, H. Longino, & K. Waters, Scientific Pluralism, vii-xxviii, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar

  • Kitcher, P., 1993, Function and Design, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 379-397.Google Scholar

  • Kitcher, P., 2012, Preludes to Pragmatism: Towards a Reconstruction of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Kondrashov, A., 2005, Evolutionary Biology: Fruitfly Genome is Not Junk, Nature, 1106.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Millikan, R. G., 1984, Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Mitchell, S., 2002, Integrative pluralism, Biology and Philosophy, 55-70.Google Scholar

  • Mitchell, S., 2004, Why Integrative Pluralism?, Emergence Publications, 81-91.Google Scholar

  • Müller, G., 2007, Evo–Devo: Extending the Evolutionary Synthesis, Nature Reviews, 1-7.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Odling-Smee, J. et al., 1996, Niche Construction, The American Naturalist, 641-648.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Peacocke, C., 1979, Holistic Explanation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Preston, B., 1998, Why is a Wing Like a Spoon? A Pluralist Theory of Function, Journal of Philosophy, 215-254.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ross, D., Ladyman, J., Collier, J., 2007, Rainforest Realism and the Unity of Science, in Everything Must Go, 190-257, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Sherman, P. W., 1998, The Levels of Analysis, Animal Behaviour, 616-619.Google Scholar

  • Sterelny, K., 1996, Explanatory Pluralism in Evolutionary Biology, Biololgy and Philosophy, 193-214.Google Scholar

  • Suppes, P., 1978, The Plurality of Science, Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 3-16.Google Scholar

  • Waters, K., 2006, A Pluralist Interpretation of Gene-Centered Biology, in S. Kellert, H. Longino, & K. Waters, Scientific Pluralism, 190-215, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar

  • Wright, L., 1973, Functions, Philosophical Review, 139-68.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-04-30

Published in Print: 2016-04-01


Citation Information: Kairos. Journal of Philosophy & Science, ISSN (Online) 1647-659X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kjps-2016-0001.

Export Citation

© 2016 Jamie Shaw, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in