IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v34y2010i1p51-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Engineering and the dual nature of technical artefacts

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Kroes

Abstract

An analysis of the descriptions of technical artefacts by engineers shows that they use structural and functional concepts in their descriptions. On the basis of this I argue that engineers use a structure-function conception of technical artefacts: technical artefacts are physical structures with functional properties. Taking into account the different nature of structural (physical) and functional properties, I put forward the claim that technical artefacts have a dual nature. This dual nature is interpreted in an epistemological and an ontological sense. In order to explicate the role of human intentions in the ontology of technical artefacts the paper closes with a brief examination of the relation between this dual nature conception of technical artefacts and Thomasson's theory of the metaphysical status of artefact kinds as mind-dependent entities. Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Kroes, 2010. "Engineering and the dual nature of technical artefacts," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 51-62, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:34:y:2010:i:1:p:51-62
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bep019
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philip Faulkner & Clive Lawson & Jochen Runde, 2010. "Theorising technology," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 1-16, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:34:y:2010:i:1:p:51-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.