Darwin's concept of final cause: Neither new nor trivial [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 17 (3):323-340 (2002)
Darwin'suse of final cause accords with the Aristotelian idea of finalcauses as explanatory types – as opposed to mechanical causes, which arealways particulars. In Wright's consequence etiology, anadaptation is explained by particular events, namely, its past consequences;hence, that etiology is mechanistic at bottom. This justifies Ghiselin'scharge that such versions of teleology trivialize the subject, But a purelymechanistic explanation of an adaptation allows it to appear coincidental.Patterns of outcome, whether biological or thermodynamic, cannot be explainedbytracing causal chains, even were that possible. They are explicanda of aspecialkind. The form of their explanation, in statistical mechanics or by naturalselection, is not captured by statistical variants of the covering-law model orrelated models of explanation. In them as in classical teleology, types ofoutcome are cited to explain why there are outcomes of those types. But onlywhen types are explanatory by being selected for, as inexplanations of animal and human behavior as well as in Darwin's theory ofnatural selection, but not in statistical mechanics, is the explanationteleological. Darwin's theory is nontrivially teleological.
|Keywords||Aristotle Darwin Explanation Final cause Natural selection Statistical mechanics Teleology|
|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
Christopher Southgate & Andrew Robinson (2010). Interpretation and the Origin of Life. Zygon 45 (2):345-360.
Andrew Robinson & Christopher Southgate (2010). A General Definition of Interpretation and its Application to Origin of Life Research. Biology and Philosophy 25 (2):163-181.
Michael Chase (2011). Teleology and Final Causation in Aristotle and in Contemporary Science. Dialogue 50 (03):511-536.
Stephen Pratten (2009). Critical Realism and Causality: Tracing the Aristotelian Legacy. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 39 (2):189-218.
Jesper Hoffmeyer (2010). Relations: The True Substrate for Evolution. Semiotica 2010 (178):81-103.
Similar books and articles
Michael T. Ghiselin (1994). Darwin's Language May Seem Teleological, but His Thinking is Another Matter. Biology and Philosophy 9 (4):489-492.
Alexander Rosenberg (1983). Fitness. Journal of Philosophy 80 (8):457-473.
Alexander Rosenberg (2008). Fitness. Journal of Philosophy.
Doren A. Recker (1987). Causal Efficacy: The Structure of Darwin's Argument Strategy in the Origin of Species. Philosophy of Science 54 (2):147-175.
Elisabeth A. Lloyd (1983). The Nature of Darwin's Support for the Theory of Natural Selection. Philosophy of Science 50 (1):112-129.
Stephen G. Alter (2007). Separated at Birth: The Interlinked Origins of Darwin's Unconscious Selection Concept and the Application of Sexual Selection to Race. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 40 (2):231 - 258.
Robert A. Skipper (2004). Perspectives on the Animal Mind. Biology and Philosophy 19 (4):483-487.
Edward S. Reed (1978). Darwin's Evolutionary Philosophy: The Laws of Change. Acta Biotheoretica 27 (3-4):201-235.
James G. Lennox (1993). Darwin Was a Teleologist. Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):409-421.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads43 ( #110,538 of 1,941,049 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,101 of 1,941,049 )
How can I increase my downloads?