Changing the Mission of Theories of Teleology 35
Fodor, J. (1987). Psychosemantics. Cambridge, Mass.: Bradford/The MIT Press.
Fodor, J. (1990). A theory of content I. In: A Theory of Content and Other Essays. Cambridge, Mass.: Bradford/
The MIT Press.
Gettier, E. (1963). Is justifi ed true belief knowledge? Analysis, 23: 121–123.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (1993). Functions: Consensus without unity. Pacifi c Philosophical Quarterly, 74: 196–208.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (1994). A modern history theory of functions. Noûs, 28: 344–362.
Goldman, A. (1976). Discrimination and perceptual knowledge. Journal of Philosophy, 73: 771–791.
Goldman, A. (1986). Epistemology and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Griffi ths, P. E. (1993). Functional analysis and proper functions. The British Journal for the Philosophy of
Science, 44: 409–422.
Hempel, C. G. (1959). The logic of functional analysis. Reprinted in: Aspects of Scientifi c Explanation, 297–330.
New York: Free Press, 1965.
Kitcher, P. (1993). Function and design. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 18: 379–397.
Lehrer, K. (1974). Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lehrer, K. (1990). Theory of Knowledge. Boulder, Colo.:Westview Press.
Lehrer, K. (1997). Self Trust: A Study of Reason, Knowledge and Autonomy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mayr, E. (1974). The multiple meanings of teleological. Reprinted with a new postscript in: Mayr, E. (1988).
Towards a New Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
McLaughlin, P. (2001). What Functions Explain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Millikan, R. G. (1984). Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories: New Foundations for Realism.
Cambridge, Mass.: Bradford/The MIT Press.
Millikan, R. G. (1986). Thoughts without laws: Cognitive science without content.” Philosophical Review, 95:
47–80.
Millikan, R. G. (1989a). In defense of proper functions. Philosophy of Science, 56: 288–302 (also in Millikan
1993).
Millikan, R. G. (1989b). Biosemantics. The Journal of Philosophy, 86: 281–297 (also in Millikan 1993).
Millikan, R. G. (1989c). An ambiguity in the notion of “function.” Biology and Philosophy, 4: 172–176.
Millikan, R. G. (1990). Truth rules, hoverfl ies, and the Kripke-Wittgenstein paradox. In: White Queen Psychology
and Other Essays for Alice. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1993.
Millikan, R. G. (1993). White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT
Press.
Millikan, R. G. (2002). Biofunctions: Two paradigms. In: Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of Psychol-
ogy and Biology (Ariew, A., Cummins, R., Perlman, M., eds.), 113–143. Oxford and New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientifi c Explanation. New York: Harcourt,
Brace & World.
Nagel, E. (1977). Teleology revisited. The Journal of Philosophy, 74: 261–301.
Neander, K. (1991a). The teleological notion of “function.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 69: 454–468.
Neander, K. (1991b). Functions as selected effects: The conceptual analyst’s defense. Philosophy of Science, 58:
168–184.
Neander, K. (1995). Misrepresenting and malfunctioning. Philosophical Studies, 79: 109–41.
Neander, K. (1996). Dretske’s innate modesty. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 74: 258–74.
Nissen, L. (1997). Teleological Language in the Life Sciences. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefi eld.
Papineau, D. (1987). Reality and Representation. Oxford: Blackwell.
Perlman, M. (2000). Conceptual Flux: Mental Representation, Misrepresentation, and Concept Change.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.