David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 14 (4):561-584 (1999)
This paper is concerned with the debate in evolutionary epistemology about the nature of the evolutionary process at work in the development of science: whether it is Darwinian or Lamarckian. It is claimed that if we are to make progress through the many arguments that have grown up around this issue, we must return to an examination of the concepts of change and evolution, and examine the basic kinds of mechanism capable of bringing evolution about. This examination results in two kinds of processes being identified, dubbed direct and indirect, and these are claimed to exhaust all possibilities. These ideas are then applied to a selection of the debates within evolutionary epistemology. It is shown that while arguments about the pattern and rate of evolutionary change are necessarily inconclusive, those concerning the origin of novel variations and the mode of inheritance can be resolved by means of the distinctions made here. It is claimed that the process of selection in the evolution of science can also be clarified. The conclusion is that the main process producing the evolution of science is a direct or Lamarckian one although, if realism is correct, an indirect or Darwinian process plays a vital role.
|Keywords||change evolution evolutionary epistemology selection|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Hussey (2002). Thinking About Change. Nursing Philosophy 3 (2):104-113.
Trevor Hussey (2002). Evolution and Nursing. Nursing Philosophy 3 (3):240-251.
Similar books and articles
Rony Armon (2010). Beyond Darwinism's Eclipse: Functional Evolution, Biochemical Recapitulation and Spencerian Emergence in the 1920s and 1930s. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 41 (1):173 - 194.
Raphael Falk (1993). Evolutionary Epistemology: What Phenotype is Selected and Which Genotype Evolves? Biology and Philosophy 8 (2):153-172.
Dr Liane M. Gabora (forthcoming). The Fate of Evolutionary Archaeology: Survival or Extinction? Philosophical Explorations.
Kim Sterelny (1994). Science and Selection. Biology and Philosophy 9 (1):45-62.
Paul Thagard (1980). Against Evolutionary Epistemology. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:187 - 196.
Richard R. Nelson (2007). Universal Darwinism and Evolutionary Social Science. Biology and Philosophy 22 (1):73-94.
Carla E. Kary (1982). Can Darwinian Inheritance Be Extended From Biology to Epistemology? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:356 - 369.
Wim J. van der Steen (2000). Methodological Problems in Evolutionary Biology. XIII. Evolution and Knowledge. Acta Biotheoretica 48 (1):73-84.
Franz M. Wuketits (1986). Evolution as a Cognition Process: Towards an Evolutionary Epistemology. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 1 (2):191-206.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #189,581 of 1,725,162 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,161 of 1,725,162 )
How can I increase my downloads?