多元主义、实用主义与功能解释

Jamie Shaw
{"title":"多元主义、实用主义与功能解释","authors":"Jamie Shaw","doi":"10.1515/kjps-2016-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":52005,"journal":{"name":"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"1 - 18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pluralism, Pragmatism and Functional Explanations\",\"authors\":\"Jamie Shaw\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/kjps-2016-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52005,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 18\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/kjps-2016-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kjps-2016-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

虽然许多哲学家在生物学哲学中谈到“多元主义”,但很少有人说这种多元主义是什么,或者它的潜在假设是什么。这引起了我对多元主义是否与他们对自然主义的承诺相容的焦虑(cussin 1992)。本文调查了三个突出的多元主义立场(桑德拉·米切尔和迈克尔·迪特里希(2006)的“综合多元主义”,以及彼得·戈弗雷-史密斯(1993)和贝丝·普雷斯顿(1998)对进化生物学中功能解释的多元主义分析),并展示了这三个人是如何致力于实用主义形式的。这种分析既澄清了多元主义的理由和基础,又使这些多元主义避免了库辛斯的批评。最后,我就多元主义及其与历史和一体化的关系提出了一些一般性的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Pluralism, Pragmatism and Functional Explanations
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
A parrésia em Foucault - tecimentos Lying, computers and self-awareness Equações Como Ícones (Seguidos Das Suas Peircianas “Verdades Insuspeitadas”) On how statistics is used and abused to find truth in Science Jean-Yves Mercury, Chemins Avec et Autour de Merleau-Ponty (Paris, L’Harmattan, 2019)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1