Function and teleology can be naturalized either by reference to systems with a particular type of organization (organizational
views) or by reference to a particular kind of history (etiological views). As functions are generally ascribed to states
or traits according to their current role and regardless of their origin, etiological accounts are inappropriate. Here, I
offer a systems-theoretical interpretation as a new version of an organizational account of functionality, which is more comprehensive
than traditional cybernetic views and provides explicit criteria for empirically testable function ascriptions. I propose,
that functional states, traits or items are those components of a complex system, which are under certain circumstances necessary
for their self-re-production. I show, how this notion can be applied in intra- and trans-generational function ascriptions
in biology, how it can deal with the problems of multifunctionality and functional equivalents, and how it relates to concepts
like fitness and adaptation. Finally, I argue that most intentional explanations can be treated as functional explanations
This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.