Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
dc.contributor.author
Barberis, Sergio Daniel
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.date.available
2016-01-18T19:33:14Z
dc.date.issued
2013-04
dc.identifier.citation
Barberis, Sergio Daniel; Functional Analyses, Mechanistic Explanations and Explanatory Tradeoffs; International Association for Cognitive Science; Journal of Cognitive Science; 14; 3; 4-2013; 229-251
dc.identifier.issn
1598-2327
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/3690
dc.description.abstract
Recently, Piccinini and Craver have stated three theses concerning the relations between functional analysis and mechanistic explanation in cognitive sciences: No Distinctness: functional analysis and mechanistic explanation are explanations of the same kind; Integration: functional analysis is a kind of mechanistic explanation; and Subordination: functional analyses are unsatisfactory sketches of mechanisms. In this paper, I argue, first, that functional analysis and mechanistic explanations are sub-kinds of explanation by scientific (idealized) models. From that point of view, we must take into account the tradeoff between the representational/explanatory goals of generality and precision that govern the practice of model-building. In some modeling scenarios, it is rational to maximize explanatory generality at the expense of mechanistic precision. This tradeoff allows me to put forward a problem for the mechanist position. If mechanistic modeling endorses generality as a valuable goal, then Subordination should be rejected. If mechanists reject generality as a goal, then Integration is false. I suggest that mechanists should accept that functional analysis can offer acceptable explanations of cognitive phenomena.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language.iso
eng
dc.publisher
International Association for Cognitive Science
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.subject
Functional Analysis
dc.subject
Mechanistic Explanation
dc.subject
Model Explanation
dc.subject
Generality
dc.subject.classification
Filosofía, Historia y Filosofía de la Ciencia y la Tecnología
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
Filosofía, Ética y Religión
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
HUMANIDADES
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.title
Functional Analyses, Mechanistic Explanations and Explanatory Tradeoffs
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.date.updated
2016-03-30 10:35:44.97925-03
dc.journal.volume
14
dc.journal.number
3
dc.journal.pagination
229-251
dc.journal.pais
Corea del Sur
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.journal.ciudad
Seul
dc.description.fil
Fil: Barberis, Sergio Daniel. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Filosofía "Dr. Alejandro Korn"; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
dc.journal.title
Journal of Cognitive Science
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://philarchive.org/archive/BARFAM-3
Archivos asociados