David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
BioEssays 25 (6):596-602 (2003)
The so-called ‘‘species problem’’ has plagued evolution- ary biology since before Darwin’s publication of the aptly titled Origin of Species. Many biologists think the problem is just a matter of semantics; others complain that it will not be solved until we have more empirical data. Yet, we don’t seem to be able to escape discussing it and teaching seminars about it. In this paper, I briefly examine the main themes of the biological and philosophical liter- atures on the species problem, focusing on identifying common threads as well as relevant differences. I then argue two fundamental points. First, the species problem is not primarily an empirical one, but it is rather fraught with philosophical questions that require—but cannot be settled by—empirical evidence. Second, the (dis-)solution lies in explicitly adopting Wittgenstein’s idea of ‘‘family resemblance’’ or cluster concepts, and to consider spe- cies as an example of such concepts. This solution has several attractive features, including bringing together apparently diverging themes of discussion among bio- logists and philosophers. The current proposal is con- ceptually independent (though not incompatible) with the pluralist approach to the species problem advocated by Mishler, Donoghue, Kitcher and Dupre ́, which implies that distinct aspects of the species question need to be emphasized depending on the goals of the researcher. From the biological literature, the concept of species that most closely matches the philosophical discussion pre- sented here is Templeton’s cohesion idea.
|Keywords||family resemblance species concept Wittgenstein|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Massimo Pigliucci (2005). Wittgenstein Solves (Posthumously) the Species Problem. Philosophy Now (Mar/Apr):51.
Marc Ereshefsky (2010). Microbiology and the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):553-568.
Marc Ereshefsky (2010). Darwin's Solution to the Species Problem. Synthese 175 (3):405 - 425.
Mark Ridley (1989). The Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 4 (1):1-16.
Ingo Brigandt (2003). Species Pluralism Does Not Imply Species Eliminativism. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1305–1316.
Richard A. Richards (2010). The Species Problem: A Philosophical Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Hugh Lehman (1967). Are Biological Species Real? Philosophy of Science 34 (2):157-167.
Marc Ereshefsky (1998). Species Pluralism and Anti-Realism. Philosophy of Science 65 (1):103-120.
Peter J. Beurton (1995). How is a Species Kept Together? Biology and Philosophy 10 (2):181-196.
Bradley E. Wilson (1995). A (Not-so-Radical) Solution to the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 10 (3):339-356.
Joel D. Velasco (2008). Species Concepts Should Not Conflict with Evolutionary History, but Often Do. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 39 (4):407-414.
Mark Wilkinson (1990). A Commentary on Ridley's Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 5 (4):433-446.
Gregory J. Morgan & W. Brad Pitts (2008). Evolution Without Species: The Case of Mosaic Bacteriophages. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):745-765.
Added to index2012-02-01
Total downloads149 ( #3,772 of 1,004,658 )
Recent downloads (6 months)82 ( #290 of 1,004,658 )
How can I increase my downloads?