it'd be nice if we had compact, intuitive language for talking about the fitness advantages and the stresses that are their mirror image that caused an evolved feature to be selected for without resorting to speaking of an evolved feature's "design goals" or "purpose"
-
-
which isn't a distinction that exists in the dynamics shaping these systems
-
Gotcha. Millikan talks about “proper functions” which is mayyyybe less prone to forcibly singular-ising. But maybe this is not a problem of terminology but attitude anyway?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.