David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (3):271 – 283 (1990)
Abstract This paper turns the tables on the criticisms of sociobiology that stem from a sociological perspective; many of those criticisms lack cogency and coherence in such measure as to demand, in their turn, a psycho?sociological explanation rather than a rational justification. This thesis, after a brief exposition of the main ideas of sociobiology, is argued in terms of four of the most prominent complaints made against it. Far from embodying tired prejudices about the psychological and sociological implications of biology, sociobiology actually reverses a number of naive assumptions about the consequences of natural selection. I surmise that what really provokes the critics of sociobiology is a certain philosophical relevance of sociobiology both in the broad sense (the application of natural selection principles to behaviour) and in the narrow sense (the insistence on the centrality of certain mechanisms, such as gene selection). In both cases, taking biology seriously affects our philosophical vision of the nature of human beings. At the deepest level, however, the distinction between the level at which rational criteria apply and those where we must have recourse to psycho?social explanations probably breaks down
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Helen E. Longino (1990). Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton University Press.
Philip Kitcher (1989). Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature. Journal of Philosophy 86 (7):385-391.
Edward O. Wilson (2000). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Journal of the History of Biology 33 (3):577-584.
James W. McAllister (2014). Editor's Report, 2013. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 28 (3):231-233.
James W. McAllister, Lars Bergström, James Robert Brown, Martin Carrier, Nancy Cartwright, Jiwei Ci, David Davies, Catherine Elgin, Márta Fehér & Michel Ghins (2010). First Page Preview. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (4).
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Li Jianhui & Hong Fan (2003). Science as Ideology: The Rejection and Reception of Sociobiology in China. Journal of the History of Biology 36 (3):567 - 578.
Harmon R. Holcomb (1987). Criticism, Commitment, and the Growth of Human Sociobiology. Biology and Philosophy 2 (1):43-63.
Kevin J. Sharpe (1992). Biology Intersects Religion and Morality. Biology and Philosophy 7 (1):77-88.
Tamas Bereczkei (1993). An Intellectual Legacy of the Past: The Reception of Sociobiology in the East-European Countries. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):399-407.
R. Paul Thompson (1980). Is Sociobiology a Pseudoscience? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 370.
Jason M. Byron (2005). Sociobiology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Michael Ruse (1987). Is Sociobiology a New Paradigm? Philosophy of Science 54 (1):98-104.
Added to index2009-02-01
Total downloads12 ( #200,583 of 1,725,413 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,420 of 1,725,413 )
How can I increase my downloads?