Design Without Designer? Function and Dysfunction in Cultural Evolutionary Theory

A conceptual tension exists in accounting for cultural function within a Darwinian framework. In biology, functions are understood etiologically: a trait's function is the effect for which it was historically selected (e.g., hearts pump blood). In culture, by contrast, traits are often deliberately designed for specific purposes, suggesting a teleological notion of function (e.g., vaccines prevent disease). This raises doubts about whether Cultural Evolutionary Theory can adequately capture cultural function. Defences often argue that intentionality is compatible with Darwinism, but this paper shows these strategies leave the issue unresolved and could undermine Darwin's philosophical innovation: "design without a designer". We argue instead for a multi-level framework that assigns etiology and teleology to distinct explanatory levels as a direction to dissolve the tension. This approach preserves Darwinism while clarifying how to identify cultural function and dysfunction.