David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):377-403 (1996)
This paper evaluates and criticises the developmental systems conception of evolution and develops instead an extension of the gene's eye conception of evolution. We argue (i) Dawkin's attempt to segregate developmental and evolutionary issues about genes is unsatisfactory. On plausible views of development it is arbitrary to single out genes as the units of selection. (ii) The genotype does not carry information about the phenotype in any way that distinguishes the role of the genes in development from that other factors. (iii) There is no simple and general causal criterion which distinguishes the role of genes in development and evolution. (iv) There is, however, an important sense in which genes but not every other developmental factor represent the phenotype. (v) The idea that genes represent features of the phenotype forces us to recognise that genes are not the only, or almost the only, replicators. Many mechanisms of replication are involved in both development and evolution. (vi) A conception of evolutionary history which recognises both genetic and non-genetic replicators, lineages of replicators and interactors has advantages over both the radical rejection of the replicator/interactor distinction and the conservative restriction of replication to genetic replication.
|Keywords||development developmental systems gene genetic information evolution information inheritance interactor Lamarck Meme replicator selection unit of selection vehicle Weismann|
|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
Arnon Levy (2011). Information in Biology: A Fictionalist Account. Noûs 45 (4):640-657.
James Maclaurin & Heather Dyke (2012). What is Analytic Metaphysics For? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (2):291-306.
Carl T. Bergstrom & Martin Rosvall (2011). The Transmission Sense of Information. Biology and Philosophy 26 (2):159-176.
Peter Godfrey-Smith (2011). Senders, Receivers, and Genetic Information: Comments on Bergstrom and Rosvall. Biology and Philosophy 26 (2):177-181.
Nicholas Shea (2011). What's Transmitted? Inherited Information. Biology and Philosophy 26 (2):183-189.
Similar books and articles
Brant Pridmore (2008). Review of Genes in Development: Re-Reading the Molecular Paradigm. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):579-586.
Holmes Rolston (2006). What is a Gene? From Molecules to Metaphysics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (6):471-497.
T. Lewens (2002). Development Aid: On Ontogeny and Ethics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (2):195-217.
Masatoshi Nei (2007). The New Mutation Theory of Phenotypic Evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104 (30):12335-12242.
Bence Nanay (2011). Replication Without Replicators. Synthese 179 (455):477.
Paul E. Griffiths & Russell D. Gray (1997). Replicator II – Judgement Day. Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):471-492.
John S. Wilkins, Ian Musgrave & Clem Stanyon (2012). Selection Without Replicators: The Origin of Genes, and the Replicator/Interactor Distinction in Etiobiology. Biology and Philosophy 27 (2):215-239.
James Griesemer (2000). Development, Culture, and the Units of Inheritance. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):368.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #35,686 of 1,100,097 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #51,421 of 1,100,097 )
How can I increase my downloads?