Graduate studies at Western
In Alan Love (ed.), Conceptual Change in Biology: Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives on Evolution and Development. Springer Verlag, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science (2013)
|Abstract||Evo-Devo exhibits a plurality of scientific “cultures” of practice and theory. When are the cultures acting—individually or collectively—in ways that actually move research forward, empirically, theoretically, and ethically? When do they become imperialistic, in the sense of excluding and subordinating other cultures? This chapter identifies six cultures – three /styles/ (mathematical modeling, mechanism, and history) and three /paradigms/ (adaptationism, structuralism, and cladism). The key assumptions standing behind, under, or within each of these cultures are explored. Characterizing the internal structure of the cultures is necessary for understanding how they collaborate or compete, and how they are fragmented or integrated, in the rich interdisciplinary /trading zone/ (Galison 1997) of Evo-Devo. Evo-Devo is an important example of how science can progress through a radical plurality of perspectives and cultures.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jason Scott Robert (2002). How Developmental is Evolutionary Developmental Biology? Biology and Philosophy 17 (5):591-611.
Lindsay R. Craig (2009). Defending Evo‐Devo: A Response to Hoekstra and Coyne. Philosophy of Science 76 (3):335-344.
Scott F. Gilbert (2003). Evo-Devo, Devo-Evo, and Devgen-Popgen. Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):347-352.
Laura Nuño de la Rosa & Arantza Etxeberria, Pattern and Process in Evo-Devo: Descriptions and Explanations.
Stavros Ioannidis (2008). How Development Changes Evolution: Conceptual and Historical Issues in Evolutionary Developmental Biology. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):567-578.
Eva Jablonka & Ehud Lamm (2008). Integrating Evolution and Development: From Theory to Practice. [REVIEW] Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 51 (4):636-47.
Brett Calcott (2013). Why How and Why Aren't Enough: More Problems with Mayr's Proximate-Ultimate Distinction. Biology and Philosophy 28 (5):767-780.
Rachael L. Brown (2013). What Evolvability Really Is. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axt014.
R. Allen Gardner (2005). Animal Cognition Meets Evo-Devo. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (5):699-700.
Simon M. Reader (2006). Evo-Devo, Modularity, and Evolvability: Insights for Cultural Evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (4):361-362.
Ronald A. Jenner (2009). From Embryology to Evo-Devo: A History of Developmental Evolution (Review). Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 52 (3):458-462.
Ingo Brigandt (forthcoming). Evolutionary Developmental Biology and the Limits of Philosophical Accounts of Mechanistic Explanation. In P.-A. Braillard and C. Malaterre (ed.), Explanation in Biology: An Enquiry into the Diversity of Explanatory Patterns in the Life Sciences. Springer.
Andrew Hamilton (2009). Toward a Mechanistic Evo Devo. In Manfred Laubichler & Jane Maienschein (eds.), Form and Function in Developmental Evolution. Cambridge University Press.
Michael Ruse (2005). Evo-Devo: A New Evolutionary Paradigm? Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 80 (56):8-.
Added to index2011-08-18
Total downloads139 ( #3,992 of 738,617 )
Recent downloads (6 months)35 ( #3,173 of 738,617 )
How can I increase my downloads?