Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Problem of Phantom Functions

  • Critical Discussion
  • Published:
Erkenntnis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses a recent solution to the problem of artifact phantom functions by Beth Preston. A phantom function is a function associated with a kind of artifact that it is structurally incapable of performing. Preston proposes a criterion of artifact proper function according to which phantom functions can be proper functions. This paper argues that Preston’s criterion cannot ground the teleological and normative aspects definitive of proper functions and that the proposed criterion is not consistent with Preston’s account of how copies of novel prototypes acquire proper functions. The paper defends an understanding of phantom functions suggested in earlier work by Preston.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Preston does not use the expression “artifact” but “material culture.” However, for ease of exposition, I will use “artifact.”

  2. I use this case as a parallel to Preston’s fengshui mirror case. I think it is helpful to consider a case that is not based on an actual practice in order to avoid prejudging the issue of whether we should take phantom functions to be proper functions.

  3. See Buller (1998) for an excellent discussion of versions of etiological theories and the role of selection and reproduction.

References

  • Buller, D. (1998). Etiological theories of function: a geographical survey. Biology and Philosophy, 13, 505–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franssen, M., Kroes, P., Reydon, T. A. C., & Vermaas, P. E. (2014). Artifact kinds. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kroes, P. (2012). Technical artifacts: Creations of mind and matter. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewens, T. (2004). Organisms and artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, E., & Laurence, S. (2007). Creations of the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, B. (1998). Why is a wing like a spoon? Journal of Philosophy, 95(5), 215–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, B. (2013). A philosophy of material culture. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermaas, P., & Houkes, W. (2010). Technical functions. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, L. (1973). Function. The Philosophical Review, 82(2), 139–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophy Section, Department of Media, Cognition, and Communiction, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Sune Holm

Authors
  1. Sune Holm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sune Holm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Holm, S. The Problem of Phantom Functions. Erkenn 82, 233–241 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-016-9814-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-016-9814-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation