最近人类合作研究的终极/近似区别

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE Pub Date : 2009-08-18 DOI:10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179
Caterina Marchionni, J. Vromen
{"title":"最近人类合作研究的终极/近似区别","authors":"Caterina Marchionni, J. Vromen","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2009-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Ultimate/Proximate Distinction in Recent Accounts of Human Cooperation\",\"authors\":\"Caterina Marchionni, J. Vromen\",\"doi\":\"10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,\",\"PeriodicalId\":53935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

行为科学的特点是有多种不同形式的解释。恩斯特·迈尔(Ernst Mayrs, 1961)对终极解释和近因解释的著名区分有时被用来解释这一多元性的一部分。进化论通过诉诸于过去的进化力量(自然选择就是一个显著的例子)来解释人类行为,而近因解释则通过诉诸于当前的认知和心理机制来解释。尽管哲学家和科学家广泛使用这一区分,但其确切内容仍不清楚。那些研究过这种区别的哲学家们并没有就终极解释是哪种解释达成共识,也没有就它们与近因解释的关系达成共识(arview 2003; Beatty 1994;
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
The Ultimate/Proximate Distinction in Recent Accounts of Human Cooperation
The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: In het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie verschijnen thematische bijdragen, historische en kritische studies, literatuuroverzichten, boekbesprekingen en kronieken. Het staat open voor alle actuele stromingen in en voor discussies op de verscheidene domeinen van de filosofie. Het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie bevat bijdragen van filosofen uit verschillende landen. Het besteedt in het bijzonder aandacht aan het wijsgerige leven in Nederland en Vlaanderen en wil op wetenschappelijk niveau het wijsgerig gesprek in het Nederlands bevorderen. Elke bijdrage wordt ‘dubbel blind’ beoordeeld door tenminste twee deskundigen, afkomstig van verschillende universiteiten.
期刊最新文献
Een zee in het midden van de wereld : Afrikaans-Europese migratie, zwarte filosofie en het einde van de witte mythologie De nieuwe poortwachters van de waarheid Vieweg, Klaus: Hegel. Der Philosoph der Freiheit. Biographie. München: C.H. Beck 2019 "The Constructivist Turn in Political Representation" redactie: Lisa Disch, Nadia Urbinati, Mathijs van de Sande Free will skepticism, just deserts and justice without retribution an interview with Farah Focquaert
×
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