David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 32 (1):127-151 (2001)
Biologists Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould have recently extended their decades-old disagreements about evolution to the issue of the nature and reality of evolutionary progress. According to Gould, 'progress' is a noxious notion that deserves to be expunged from evolutionary biology. In Dawkins' view, on the other hand, progress is one of the most important, pervasive and inevitable aspects of evolution. Simple appeals to 'the evidence' are clearly insufficient to resolve this disagreement, since it is precisely the interpretation of the evidence that is in dispute. Scientific controversies in general, and the Dawkins/Gould dispute over evolutionary progress in particular, are worth examining in some detail because doing so sheds light on the interconnected roles of methodological and contextual factors in the formation, articulation and defense of scientific claims. My aim in this paper is to clarify the structure of the Dawkins/Gould dispute by analyzing it in terms of a tri-level model of scientific controversies, involving 'top-level' substantive disagreements, 'middle-level' methodological differences, and 'bottom-level' differences in historical and social factors. This simple three-tiered model is sufficiently abstract to have more general applicability to other scientific controversies.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Bernd Rosslenbroich (2006). The Notion of Progress in Evolutionary Biology – the Unresolved Problem and an Empirical Suggestion. Biology and Philosophy 21 (1):41-70.
Kim Sterelny (2003). Last Will and Testament: Stephen Jay Gould's the Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Philosophy of Science 70 (2):255-263.
Lee Mcintyre (1997). Gould on Laws in Biological Science. Biology and Philosophy 12 (3):357-367.
J. M. Fritzman & Molly Gibson (2012). Schelling, Hegel, and Evolutionary Progress. Perspectives on Science 20 (1):105-128.
Philip Kitcher (2004). Evolutionary Theory and the Social Uses of Biology. Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):1-15.
Francisco J. Ayala, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory: On Stephen Jay Gould's Monumental Masterpiece.
Derek Turner (2011). Gould's Replay Revisited. Biology and Philosophy 26 (1):65-79.
Richard Dawkins (1997). Human Chauvinism. Review of Full House by Stephen Jay Gould. Evolution 51 (3).
Todd A. Grantham (2004). Constraints and Spandrels in Gould's Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):29-43.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #61,046 of 1,089,107 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,981 of 1,089,107 )
How can I increase my downloads?