Structural Flaws

Massive Modularity and the Argument from Design

Datos Bibliográficos

ID8395990
AutoresArmin W Schulz (0000-0003-2938-0150, University of Wisconsin–Madison, autor de correspondencia)
Año2008
Volumen59
Número4
Páginas733-743
Fecha de publicación2008-12-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaThe British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0007-0882 • E-ISSN: 1464-3537
EditorialOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/bjps/axn036
OpenAlexW2033230740
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas3
Referencias citadas11

The ‘argument from design’ plays a pivotal role in Carruthers’ recent defence of the massive modularity thesis. However, as this paper seeks to show, there are major flaws in its structure. If construed deductively, it is unsound: modular mental architecture is not necessarily the best architecture, and even if it were, this alone would not show that this architecture evolved. If construed inductively, it is not much more convincing, as it then appears to be too weak to support the kind of modularity Carruthers is concerned with. The upshot of this is that whatever reason we might have for believing that the mind is massively modular, it is not based on the argument from design.1. Introduction2. Carruthers’ Argument from Design3. Modularity and Optimality: Problems for the Deductive Argument from Design4. Degrees of Modularity: Problems for the Inductive Argument from Design5. Conclusion

Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Modular design · Modularity (biology) · Programming language · Architecture · Cognitive Science and Education Research · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science