Biological Mistake Theory and the Question of Function

Abstract The making of mistakes by organisms and other living systems is a theoretically and empirically unifying feature of biological investigation. Mistake theory is a rigorous and experimentally productive way of understanding this widespread phenomenon. It does, however, run up against the long-standing “functions” debate in philosophy of biology. Against the objection that mistakes are just a kind of malfunction, and that without a position on functions there can be no theory of mistakes, we reply that this is to misunderstand the theory. In this paper we set out the basic concepts of mistake theory and then argue that mistakes are a distinctive phenomenon in their own right, not just a kind of malfunction. Moreover, the functions debate is, to a large degree, independent of the concept of biological mistakes we outline. In particular, although the popular selected effects theory may retain its place within a more pluralistic conception of biological function, there is also need for a more forward-looking approach, where a robust concept of normativity can be an important driver of future experimental work.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy of Science
Published
2024-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2024.56
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
18.13

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Biological Mistake Theory and the Question of Function

Christopher J. Austin, Jonathan Hill, Jonathan M. Gibbins, David S. Oderberg et al.
3 citations
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy and History of Science
18.13
article

Biological Mistake Theory and the Question of Function

Christopher J. Austin, Jonathan Hill, Jonathan M. Gibbins, David S. Oderberg, Ingo Bojak, François Cinotti
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract The making of mistakes by organisms and other living systems is a theoretically and empirically unifying feature of biological investigation. Mistake theory is a rigorous and experimentally productive way of understanding this widespread phenomenon. It does, however, run up against the long-standing “functions” debate in philosophy of biology. Against the objection that mistakes are just a kind of malfunction, and that without a position on functions there can be no theory of mistakes, we reply that this is to misunderstand the theory. In this paper we set out the basic concepts of mistake theory and then argue that mistakes are a distinctive phenomenon in their own right, not just a kind of malfunction. Moreover, the functions debate is, to a large degree, independent of the concept of biological mistakes we outline. In particular, although the popular selected effects theory may retain its place within a more pluralistic conception of biological function, there is also need for a more forward-looking approach, where a robust concept of normativity can be an important driver of future experimental work.

Philosophy of ScienceVol. 92(2)
University of Reading (GB)
John Templeton Foundation
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Philosophy and History of Science
18.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Biological Mistake Theory and the Question of Function — Christopher J. Austin, Jonathan Hill, et al. · Philosophy of Science (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS