Artifact dualism, materiality, and the hard problem of ontology: Some critical remarks on the dual nature of technical artifacts program

Philosophy and Technology

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 7-29

  Vaccari, Andrés ^a  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Dual nature theory; Intentionalism; Materiality; Ontology of artifacts; Ontology of systems

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874334158     PISSN: 22105433     EISSN: 22105441     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13347-011-0059-y     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Arthur, B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99, 116-131.
2. Arthur, B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. Washington: The Free Press.
3. Baker, L. R. (1999). Unity without identity: a new look at material constitution. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 23, 144-165.
4. Baker, L. R. (2004). The ontology of artifacts. Philosophical Explorations, 7(2), 99-111.
5. Baker, L. R. (2006). On the twofold nature of artifacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 132-136.
6. Barnet, B. & Eldredge, N. (2004). Material cultural evolution: An interview with Niles Eldredge. Fibreculture 3. http://three.fibreculturejournal. org/fcj-017-material-cultural-evolution-an-interview-with-niles-eldredge/ Accessed on 11th November 2007.
7. Burry, M. (2005). Homo faber. Architectural Design, 75(4), 30-37.
8. Carrara, M., & Vermaas, P. (2009). The fine-grained metaphysics of artifactual and biological functional kinds. Synthese, 169, 125-143.
9. David, P. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75, 332-337.
10. De Vries, M. J. (2005). Duality or dualism? A reply to Johan Stellingwerff. Philosophia Reformata, 70, 64-69.
11. DeRidder, J. (2006). The (alleged) inherent normativity of technological explanations. Techné, 10(1), 97-116.
12. Dipert, R. (1993). Artifacts, art works, and agency. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
13. Dipert, R. (1995). Some issues in the theory of artifacts: defining 'artifact' and related notions. The Monist, 78(2), 119-136.
14. Elder, C. (2007). On the place of artifacts in ontology. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Essays on artifacts and their representation (pp. 33-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the self. In L. H. Martin, H. Gutman, & P. H. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self: A seminar with Michel Foucault (pp. 16-49). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
16. Franssen, M., Kroes, P. & Vermaas, P. E. (Eds.) (Forthcoming). The metaphysics of technical artifacts. Synthese Library Volume.
17. Hilpinen, R. (1993). Authors and artifacts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, 93, 155-178.
18. Hilpinen, R. (2004). Artifact. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/artifact/ Accessed July 23rd, 2009.
19. Houkes, W. (2006). Knowledge of artifact functions. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 102-113.
20. Houkes, W., & Meijers, A. (2006). The ontology of artifacts: the hard problem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 118-131.
21. Houkes, W., & Vermaas, P. (2004). Actions versus functions: a plea for an alternative metaphysics of artifacts. The Monist, 87(1), 52-71.
22. Houkes, W., & Vermaas, P. (2009). Contemporary engineering and the metaphysics of artefacts: beyond the artisan model. The Monist, 92(3), 403-419.
23. Houkes, W., & Vermaas, P. (2010). Technical functions: On the use and design of artifacts. New York: Springer.
24. Houkes, W., Vermaas, P. E., Dorso, K., & de Vries, M. J. (2002). Design and use as plans: an action-theoretical account. Design Studies, 23, 303-320.
25. Illies, C., & Meijers, A. (2009). Artefacts without agency. The Monist, 92(3), 420-440.
26. Kirchoff, M. D. (2009). Material agency: a theoretical framework for ascribing agency to material culture. Techné, 13(3).
27. Knappett, C., & Malafouris, L. (2008). "Material and nonhuman agency: an introduction.". In C. Knappett & L. Malafouris (Eds.), Material agency: Towards a non-anthropocentric perspective (pp. ix-xix). New York: Springer.
28. Kroes, P. (2002). Design methodology and the nature of technical artifacts. Design Studies, 23, 287-302.
29. Kroes, P. (2006). Coherence of structural and functional descriptions of technical artifacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 137-151.
30. Kroes, P., & Meijers, A. (2002). Reply to critics. Techné, 6(2).
31. Kroes, P., & Meijers, A. (2006). Introduction: the dual nature of technical artifacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 1-4.
32. Krohs, U. (2009). Structure and coherence of two-model descriptions of technical artifacts. Techné, 13(2), 150-161.
33. Krohs, U., & Kroes, P. (2009). Philosophical perspectives on organismic and artifactual functions. In U. Krohs & P. Kroes (Eds.), Functions in biological and artificial worlds: Comparative philosophical perspectives (pp. 3-12). Cambridge and London: MIT Press.
34. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
35. Longy, F. (2006). Function and probability: the making of artifacts. Techné, 10(1), 81-96.
36. Malafouris, L. (2008). At the potter's wheel: an argument for material agency. In C. Knappett & L. Malafouris (Eds.), Material agency: Towards a non-anthropocentric perspective (pp. 19-36). New York: Springer.
37. Mauss, M. (1973). Techniques of the body. Economy and Society, 2(1), 70-88.
38. McGrail, R. (2008). Working with substance: actor-network theory and the modal weight of the material. Techné, 12(1), 65-84.
39. Mitcham, C. (2002). Do artifacts have dual natures? Two points of commentary on the Delft Project. Techné, 6(2).
40. Mumford, S. (2006). Function, structure, capacity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 76-80.
41. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency and science. University of Chicago Press.
42. Rozenburg, N., & Eekels, J. (1995). Product design: Fundamentals and methods. Chichester: Wiley.
43. Scheele, M. (2006). Social norms in artifact use: Proper function and action theory. Techné, 10(1), 65-80.
44. Searle, J. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: The Free Press.
45. Sheil, B. (2005). Design through making: An introduction. Architectural Design, 75(4), 5-12.
46. Simondon, G. (1980). The mode of existence of technical objects. [Electronic Version]. London: University of Western Ontario.
47. Simondon, G. (2008). El modo de existencia de los objetos técnicos. Buenos Aires: Prometeo.
48. Smith, B. (2007). Ontología. In G. Hurtado & O. Nudler (Eds.), El mobiliario del mundo: Ensayos de ontología y metafísica (pp. 47-73). Mexico: Universidad Autónoma de Mexico.
49. Sperber, D. (2007). Seedless grapes: nature and culture. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Essays on artifacts and their representation (pp. 124-137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50. Tenner, E. (1996). Why things bite back: Technology and the revenge of unintended consequences. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
51. Thomasson, A. (2003). Realism and human kinds. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67(3), 580-609.
52. Thomasson, A. (2007). Artifacts and human concepts. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Essays on artifacts and their representation (pp. 52-73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Vaesen, K. (2006). How norms in technology ought to be interpreted. Techné, 10(1), 117-133.
54. Vermaas, P. (2006). The physical connection: engineering function ascription to technical artifacts and their components. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 62-76.
55. Vermaas, P. (2009). On unification: taking technical functions as objective (and biological functions as subjective). In U. Krohs & P. Kroes (Eds.), Functions in biological and artificial worlds: Comparative philosophical perspectives (pp. 69-87). Cambridge: MIT Press.
56. Vermaas, P., & Houkes, W. (2003). Ascribing functions to technical artifacts: a challenge to etiological accounts of functions. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 54, 261-289.
57. Vermaas, P., & Houkes, W. (2006). Technical functions: a drawbridge between the intentional and structural natures of technical artefacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 5-18.
58. Wouters, A. (2005). The function debate in philosophy. Acta Biotheoretica, 53, 123-151.