Technical artefacts

Philosophy of Engineering and Technology

Volumn 6, Issue , 2012, Pages 13-45

  Kroes, Peter ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Dual Nature; Physical Capacity; Physical Object; Structural Description; Technical Function

Indexed keywords

EID: 85101653015     PISSN: 18797202     EISSN: 18797210     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-3940-6_2     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Chandrasekaran, Balakrishnan. 2005. Representing function: Relating functional representation and functional modelling streams. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing 19:65–74.
2. Chandrasekaran, Balakrishnan, and John R. Josephson. 2000. Function in device representation. Engineering with Computers 16 (3–4):162–177.
3. Chittaro, Luca, and Amruth N. Kumar. 1998. Reasoning about function and its applications to engineering. Artificial intelligence in engineering 12:331–336.
4. Cummins, Robert. 1975. Functional analysis. Journal of Philosophy 72 (20):741–765.
5. Davidson, Donald. 1963. Actions, reasons and causes. Journal of Philosophy 60:685–700.
6. Dennett, Daniel C. 1987. The intentional stance. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
7. Dipert, Randall R. 1993. Artifacts, Art Works, and Agency. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
8. Dretske, Fred I. 2006. Minimal rationality. In Rational animals?, eds. Susan L. Hurley, and Matthew Nudds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Duzi, Maire, Bjorn Jespersen, and Pavel Materna. 2010. Procedural semantics for hyperinten-sional logic; foundations and applications of transparent intensional logic. Springer.
10. Franssen, M. 2008. Design, use, and the physical and intentional aspects of technical artifacts. In Philosophy and design; from engineering to architecture, eds. Pieter Vermaas, Peter Kroes, Andrew Light, and Steven A. Moore, 21–35. Springer.
11. Hacking, Ian. 1983. Representing and intervening; introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Hilpinen, Risto. 2004. Artifact. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2004 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. (editor): http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2004/entries/artifact/.
13. Jespersen, Bjorn, and Massimiliano Carrara. 2011. Two conceptions of technical malfunction. Theoria 77:117–138.
14. Koepsell, David. 2009. Who owns you? The corporate gold rush to patent your genes. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
15. Kroes, P. 2003. Screwdriver philosophy; Searle’s analysis of technical functions. Techné 6 (3):22–35.
16. Kroes, P., and A. Meijers. 2006. The dual nature of technical artefacts-Introduction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (1):1–4.
17. Kroes, Peter. 2003. Physics, experiments and the concept of nature. In The philosophy of scientific experimentation, ed. H. Radder, 68–86. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
18. Kroes, Peter. 2006. Coherence of structural and functional descriptions of technical artefacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (1):137–151.
19. Kroes, Peter. 2010. Engineering and the dual nature of technical artefacts. Cambridge journal of economics 34:51–62.
20. Kroes, Peter, Maarten Franssen, Ibo van de Poel, and Maarten Ottens. 2006. Treating socio-technical systems as engineering systems: some conceptual problems. Systems research and behavioral science 23:803–814.
21. Krohs, Ulrich, and Peter Kroes. 2009. Philosophical perspectives on organismic and artifactual functions. In Functions in biological and artificial worlds; comparative philosophical perspectives, eds. Ulrich Krohs, and Peter Kroes, 3–12. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
22. Longy, Françoise. 2009. How biological, cultural, and intended functions combine. In Functions in biological and artificial worlds; comparative philosophical perspectives, eds. Ulrich Krohs, and Peter Kroes, 51–67. Cambridge Mass.: MIT.
23. Losonsky, Michael. 1990. The nature of artifacts. Philosophy 65:81–88.
24. McLaughlin, Peter. 2001. What Functions Explain: Functional Explanation and Self-Reproducing Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Millikan, Ruth. 1993. White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26. Otto, Kevin N., and Kristin L. Wood. 2001. Product design; techniques in reverse engineering and new product development. Upper Sadle River (NJ): Prentice Hall.
27. Pahl, G., and W. Beitz. 1996. Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. London: Springer Verlag.
28. Perlman, Mark. 2009. Changing the mission of theories of teleology: DOs and DON’Ts for thinking about function. In Functions in biological and artificial worlds; comparative philosophical perspectives, eds. Ulrich Krohs, and Peter Kroes, 17–36. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
29. Preston, Beth. 1998. Why is a wing like a spoon? A pluralist theory of function. Journal of Philosophy 95 (5):215–254.
30. Preston, Beth. 2008. The shrinkage factor: comment on Lynne Rudder Baker’s “The shrinking difference between artifacts and natural objects”. APA newsletter on philosophy and computers 8 (1):26–28.
31. Roozenburg, N.F.M., and J. Eekels. 1995. Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
32. Rosenman, M.A., and J.S. Gero. 1994. The what, the how, and the why in design. Applied artificial intelligence 8:199-218.
33. Searle, John. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. London: Penguin Books.
34. Simon, Herbert A. 1996 (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial. 3 rd ed. Aufl. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Sperber, Dan. 2007. Seedless grapes: nature and culture. In Creations of the mind: therories of artifacts and their representation, eds. Eric Margolis, and Stephen Laurence, 124–137. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Thomasson, Amie L. 2007. Artifacts and human concepts. In Creations of the mind: essays on artifacts and their representations, eds. Stephen Laurence, and Eric Margolis, 52–73. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Ullman, David G. 1992. The Mechanical Design Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
38. Vermaas, Pieter E., and Kees Dorst. 2007. On the conceptual framework of John Gero’s FBS-model and the prescriptive aims of design methodology. Design Studies 28 (2):133-157.
39. Wittgenstein, Ludwig, and G. E. M. Anscombe. 2003. Philosophical investigations: the German text, with a revised English translation. 3 rd Aufl. Malden, MA,: Blackwell Pub.