Abstract
Because much of the recent philosophical interest in functions has been motivated by their application in biology and other sciences, most of the ensuing discussions have focused on functional explanations to the neglect of the practical role of functional knowledge. This practical role is essential for understanding how users form plans involving artifacts. We introduce the concept of instrumental function which is intended to capture the features of functional claims that are relevant to practical—in particular, instrumental—reasoning. We discuss the four primary features of an instrumental function ascription, the teleological component of such ascriptions and give a clear definition of malfunction in terms of incapability to perform as well as “normal” tokens of the same type.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cummins R. (1975) Functional analysis. Journal of Philosophy 72(20): 741–765
Davies P.S. (2000) The nature of natural norms: Why selected functions are systemic capacity functions. Noûs 34(1): 85–107
Franssen M. (2006) The normativity of artefacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37: 42–57
Houkes W. (2006) Knowledge of artefact functions. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37: 102–113
Hughes, J. (2006). From functions to means: Practical consequences of artifactual functions. Available at http://phiwumbda.org/~jesse/papers/.
McLaughlin P. (2001) What functions explain: Functional explanation and self-reproducing systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Millikan R.G. (1984) Language, thought and other biological categories. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Millikan R.G. (1989) In defense of proper functions. Philosophy of Science 56: 288–302
Millikan R.G. (2002) Biofunctions: Two paradigms. In: Ariew A., Cummins R., Perlman M. (Eds) Functions: New essays in the philosophy of psychology and biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 113–143
Neander K. (1991) The teleological notion of function. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74: 261–301
Neander K. (1995) Misrepresenting & malfunctioning. Philosophical Studies 79(2): 109–141
Preston B. (1998) Why is a wing like a spoon? A pluralist theory of function. The Journal of Philosophy 95(5): 215–254
Schurz G. (2001) What is ‘normal’? An evolution-theoretic foundation of normic laws and their relation to statistical normality. Philosophy of Science 68(4): 476–497
Sorabji R. (1964) Function. The Philosophical Quarterly 14(57): 289–302
Vermaas P.E., Houkes W. (2003) Ascribing functions to technical artefacts: A challenge to etiological accounts of functions. British Journal for Philosophy of Science 54: 261–289
Vermaas P.E., Houkes W. (2006) Technical functions: A drawbridge between the intentional and structural natures of technical artefacts. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 37: 5–18
von Wright G.H. (1963) Practical inference. The Philosophical Review 72(2): 159–179
Wright L (1973) Functions. Philosophical Review 82: 139–168
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hughes, J. An artifact is to use: an introduction to instrumental functions. Synthese 168, 179–199 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9335-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9335-5