Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Graduate School of Systemic Neuroscience (GSN-LMU), Munich Center for Neurosciences - Brain & Mind (MCN), Research Center for Neurophilosophy and Ethics of Neuroscience, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Research Center for Neurophilosophy and Ethics of Neuroscience, Germany.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2020 Aug;82:94-103. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.01.011. Epub 2020 Jan 31.
In natural kind debates, Boyd's famous Homeostatic Property Cluster theory (HPC) is often misconstrued in two ways: Not only is it thought to make for a normative standard for natural kinds, but also to require the homeostatic mechanisms underlying nomological property clusters to be uniform. My argument for the illegitimacy of both overgeneralizations, both on systematic as well as exegetical grounds, is based on the misconstrued view's failure to account for functional kinds in science. I illustrate the combination of these two misconstruals with recent entries into the natural kind debate about emotions. Finally, I examine and reject Stich's "Kornblith-Devitt method" as a potential justification of these misconstruals.
在自然种类的争论中，博伊德著名的同型属性群理论（HPC）经常被误解为两种方式：不仅被认为是自然种类的规范标准，而且还要求规范属性群的同型机制必须是统一的。我基于对这两种误解的系统和解释性的论据，提出了对这两种误解的不合法性的论点，这是因为它们没有解释科学中的功能种类。我用关于情感的自然种类争论的最近的一些条目来说明这两种误解的结合。最后，我检查并拒绝了斯蒂克的“科恩布莱特-德威特方法”，因为它可能是对这些误解的一种辩护。
