Functional explanation
A functional explanation (also teleological explanation) is understood to mean the explanation of an object or process about the purpose it fulfills for a higher structure of whatever kind. The functional explanation finds its explanation claim in the functional necessity in relation to this higher structure.
For example, the presence of a liver in an organism is explained by the fact that it has the function of filtering out toxins from the organism. Without this functional element, the organism would not survive.
In the social sciences, this type of explanation was used in structural functionalism .
criticism
Carl Gustav Hempel and Paul Oppenheim mainly criticize this type of explanation because of its anthropomorphic character, which leads to error : Because we humans perceive ourselves as purposeful agents, we also attribute such motivation to things and processes and all too easily consider a teleological sham explanation to be true. These bogus declarations are often created in retrospect and have no predictive value. Many teleological formulations can be found in biology, for example “ Mimicry is used to deceive predators.” The purpose can be eliminated from all teleological explanations without loss and thus clear the way for a scientific explanation. The reason why they hold out for so long is probably their heuristic value. The research results of the theory of evolution are often rewritten in a quasi-religious teleological manner by laypeople , recognizable by sentences such as "Nature has arranged this wisely". “Man has a liver because otherwise he would not survive” is just a description, not a (scientific) explanation.
This type of explanation is also rejected by many social scientists . On the one hand, the reference to a diffuse overall organism (e.g. the survival of society) is criticized. On the other hand, the possibility of functional equivalents is left out. Confirmation would be explained, for example, via the integration function into adult society , without which society could not survive. However , it would only be a correct explanation in the deductive-nomological sense if all functional equivalents are specified and excluded. In the above example, a possible equivalent would be youth consecration , which makes the problematic nature of this explanation clear.
Individual evidence
- ^ Carl Gustav Hempel and Paul Oppenheim (1948). Studies in the Logic of Explanation . Philosophy of Science, 15 (2), pp. 135-175