Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T03:51:31.718Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional Explanation and Metaphysical Individualism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Justin Schwartz
Justin Schwartz*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Ohio State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

G. A. Cohen defends and Jon Elster criticizes Marxist use of functional explanation. But Elster's mechanical conception of explanation is, contrary to Elster's claims, a better basis for vindication of functional explanation than Cohen's nomological conception, which cannot provide an adequate account of functional explanation. Elster also objects that functional explanation commits us to metaphysically bizarre collective subjects, but his argument requires an implausible reading of methodological individualism which involves an unattractive eliminativism about social phenomena.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 278 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Thanks are due to Bob Batterman, Phil Gasper, Don Hubin, Peter King, Calvin Normore, Peter Railton, James Scanlan, J.D. Trout and several anonymous referees.

‡

Send reprint requests to the author, Department of Philosophy, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

References

Chomsky, N. and Herman, E. (1988), Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1978), Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1986), “Marxism and Functional Explanation”, in Roemer, J. (ed.), Analytical Marxism. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 221–234.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1989), “Reply to Elster on ‘Marxism, Functionalism, and Game Theory‘”, in Callinicos, A. (ed.), Marxist Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 88–104.Google Scholar
Cummins, R. (1984), “Functional Analysis”, in Sober, E. (ed.), Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 386–407.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1964), On the Origin of Species. Edited by May, E. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. (1980), Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. (1978), “Intentional Systems”, in Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 3–22.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1983), Sour Grapes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1984), Ulysses and the Sirens. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1985), Making Sense of Marx. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1986), “Further Thoughts on Marxism, Functionalism and Game Theory”, in Roemer, J. (ed.), Analytical Marxism. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 202–220.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1989a), The Cement of Society. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1989b), “Marxism, Functionalism, and Game Theory: The Case for Methodological Individualism”, in Callinicos, A. (ed.), Marxist Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 48–87.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1989c), Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1989d), Solomonic Judgements. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fisk, M. (1989), The State and Justice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1965), Aspects of Scientific Explanation. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. (1985), Vaulting Ambition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1975–), Collected Works. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1976), Capital, vol. 1. Translated by B. Fowkes. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1982), The Growth of Biological Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Railton, P. (1981), “Probability, Explanation, and Information”, Synthese 48: 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (1985), The Structure of Biological Science. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, J. (1991), “Reduction, Elimination, and the Mental”, Philosophy of Science 58: 203–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. C. C. (1968), Between Science and Philosophy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Wright, E. O.; Levine, A.; and Sober, E. (1987), “Marxism and Methodological Individualism”, New Left Review 162: 67–84.Google Scholar