David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 54 (4):515-538 (1987)
The key problem in the controversy over group selection is that of defining a criterion of group selection that identifies a distinct causal process that is irreducible to the causal process of individual selection. We aim to clarify this problem and to formulate an adequate model of irreducible group selection. We distinguish two types of group selection models, labeling them type I and type II models. Type I models are invoked to explain differences among groups in their respective rates of production of contained individuals. Type II models are invoked to explain differences among groups in their respective rates of production of distinct new groups. Taking Elliott Sober's model as an exemplar, we argue that although type I models have some biological importance--they force biologists to consider the role of group properties in influencing the fitness of organisms--they fail to identify a distinct group-level causal selection process. Type II models if properly framed, however, do identify a group-level causal selection process that is not reducible to individual selection. We propose such a type II model and apply it to some of the major candidates for group selection
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
John Alroy & Alexander Levine (1994). Driving Both Ways: Wilson & Sober's Conflicting Criteria for the Identification of Groups as Vehicles of Selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):608.
James F. Crow (1994). In Praise of Replicators. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):616.
Todd A. Grantham (1994). Putting the Cart Back Behind the Horse: Group Selection Does Not Require That Groups Be “Organisms”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):622.
David Sloan Wilson & Elliott Sober (1994). Group Selection: The Theory Replaces the Bogey Man. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):639.
C. Loring Brace (1994). The Consequences of Group Selection in a Domain Without Genetic Input: Culture. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):611.
Similar books and articles
John Damuth & I. Lorraine Heisler (1988). Alternative Formulations of Multilevel Selection. Biology and Philosophy 3 (4):407-430.
Samir Okasha (2003). The Concept of Group Heritability. Biology and Philosophy 18 (3):445-461.
Elliott Sober (1980). Holism, Individualism, and the Units of Selection. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:93 - 121.
Ayelet Shavit & Roberta L. Millstein (2008). Group Selection is Dead! Long Live Group Selection? BioScience 58 (7):574-575.
Samir Okasha (2001). Why Won't the Group Selection Controversy Go Away? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (1):25-50.
Nicholas S. Thompson (2000). Shifting the Natural Selection Metaphor to the Group Level. Behavior and Philosophy 28 (1/2):83 - 101.
James R. Griesemer & Michael J. Wade (1988). Laboratory Models, Causal Explanation and Group Selection. Biology and Philosophy 3 (1):67-96.
Sahotra Sarkar (2008). A Note on Frequency Dependence and the Levels/Units of Selection. Biology and Philosophy 23 (2):217-228.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #107,922 of 1,101,075 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,992 of 1,101,075 )
How can I increase my downloads?