Biology and Philosophy 12 (1) (1996)
|Abstract||Elliott Sober (1987, 1993) and Orzack and Sober (forthcoming) argue that adaptationism is a very general hypothesis that can be tested by testing various particular hypotheses that invoke natural selection to explain the presence of traits in populations of organisms. In this paper, I challenge Sobers claim that adaptationism is an hypothesis and I argue that it is best viewed as a heuristic (or research strategy). Biologists would still have good reasons for employing this research strategy even if it turns out that natural selection is not the most important cause of evolution.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Scott Atran (2002). Modest Adaptationism: Muddling Through Cognition and Language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):504-506.
Brian Haig & Russil Durrant (2002). Adaptationism and Inference to the Best Explanation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):520-521.
Johannes Martens (2011). Social Evolution and Strategic Thinking. Biology and Philosophy 26 (5):697-715.
Christopher Lang, Elliott Sober & Karen Strier (2002). Are Human Beings Part of the Rest of Nature? Biology and Philosophy 17 (5).
Roger Sansom (2003). Constraining the Adaptationism Debate. Biology and Philosophy 18 (4).
Scott Atran (2005). Adaptationism for Human Cognition: Strong, Spurious, or Weak? Mind and Language 20 (1):39-67.
Matthew Rellihan (2012). Adaptationism and Adaptive Thinking in Evolutionary Psychology. Philosophical Psychology 25 (2):245-277.
Angela Potochnik (2009). Optimality Modeling in a Suboptimal World. Biology and Philosophy 24 (2):183-197.
Elliott Sober & Steven Hecht Orzack (2003). Common Ancestry and Natural Selection. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (3):423-437.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #94,544 of 556,807 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,807 )
How can I increase my downloads?