Engineering Differences Between Natural, Social, and Artificial Kinds

0Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

My starting point is that discussions in philosophy about the ontology of technical artifacts ought to be informed by classificatory practices in engineering. Hence, the heuristic value of the natural-artificial distinction in engineering counts against arguments which favour abandoning the distinction in metaphysics. In this chapter, I present the philosophical equipment needed to analyse classificatory practices and then present a case study of engineering practice using these theoretical tools. More in particular, I make use of the Collectivist Account of Technical Artifacts (CAT) according to which there are different classificatory practices for natural, artificial, and social objects. I demonstrate that in the community studied, artificial kinds are marked by distinctive classificatory practices. The presence of these distinctive classificatory practices in engineering with regard to artificial kinds should inform discussions about the ontology of technical artifacts just as the distinctive classificatory practices in natural science inform discussions about natural kinds.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kerr, E. T. (2014). Engineering Differences Between Natural, Social, and Artificial Kinds. In Synthese Library (Vol. 365, pp. 207–225). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00801-1_12

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free