Search results for 'Evolutionary innovations' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Alan C. Love (2008). Explaining Evolutionary Innovations and Novelties: Criteria of Explanatory Adequacy and Epistemological Prerequisites. Philosophy of Science 75 (5):874-886.score: 180.0
    It is a common complaint that antireductionist arguments are primarily negative. Here I describe an alternative nonreductionist epistemology based on considerations taken from multidisciplinary research in biology. The core of this framework consists in seeing investigation as coordinated around sets of problems (problem agendas) that have associated criteria of explanatory adequacy. These ideas are developed in a case study, the explanation of evolutionary innovations and novelties, which demonstrates the applicability and fruitfulness of this nonreductionist epistemological perspective. This account (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jonathan Kaplan (2008). Evolutionary Innovations and Developmental Resources: From Stability to Variation and Back Again. Philosophy of Science 75 (5):861-873.score: 156.0
    Will a synthesis of developmental and evolutionary biology require a focus on the role of nongenetic resources in evolution? Nongenetic variation may exist but be hidden because the phenotypes are stable (developmentally canalized) under certain background conditions. In this case, those differences may come to play important roles in evolution when background conditions change. If this is so, then a focus on the way that developmental resources are made reliable, and the ways in which reliability fails, may prove to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Andreas Wagner (2008). Gene Duplications, Robustness and Evolutionary Innovations. Bioessays 30 (4):367-373.score: 150.0
  4. Adrian Friday (1992). Innovation Vs. Novelty: In Pursuit of the Undefinable Evolutionary Innovations (1991). Edited by Matthew H. Nitecki. Chicago University Press, Chicago. Pp. 304. Paperback $20.75/£14.25, Hardback. $51.75/£35.95. [REVIEW] Bioessays 14 (4):291-292.score: 150.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Ricard V. Solée, Sergi Valverde, Marti Rosas Casals, Stuart A. Kauffman, Doyne Farmer & Niles Eldredge (2013). The Evolutionary Ecology of Technological Innovations. Complexity 18 (4):15-27.score: 120.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Ulrich Krohs (2005). The Conceptual Basis of a Biological Dispute About the Temporal Order of Evolutionary Events. In Friedrich Stadler & Michael Stölzner (eds.), Time and History. Papers of the 28th International Wittgenstein Symposium. Österr. Ludwig-Wittgenstein-Gesellschaft.score: 96.0
    occurs first. The biological debate is conducted largely on a theoretical level. In this paper, I undertake to locate
    the reason for the difference in temporal ordering. The question is whether the difference depends on alternative
    interpretations of empirical data, on differing views about evolutionary mechanisms, or on different conceptual
    frameworks. It will turn out that the latter is the case and that discerning two different notions of novelty solves
    the apparent contradiction. Both concepts may apply to different cases in evolution. To settle (...)
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Lauren McCall (2007). Individual Invention Versus Socio-Ecological Innovation: Unifying the Behavioral and Evolutionary Sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (4):418-419.score: 90.0
    Great promise for the evolutionary analysis of animal behavior lies in the distinction between generative novelties and the evolutionary innovations to which they can give rise. Ramsey et al. succeed in emphasizing the contribution of individual learning and intelligence to behavioral innovations, but do not correct the tendency to confound individual invention with socio-ecological or group-level innovation.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Alan C. Love (2003). Evolutionary Morphology, Innovation, and the Synthesis of Evolutionary and Developmental Biology. Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):309-345.score: 82.0
    One foundational question in contemporarybiology is how to `rejoin evolution anddevelopment. The emerging research program(evolutionary developmental biology or`evo-devo) requires a meshing of disciplines,concepts, and explanations that have beendeveloped largely in independence over the pastcentury. In the attempt to comprehend thepresent separation between evolution anddevelopment much attention has been paid to thesplit between genetics and embryology in theearly part of the 20th century with itscodification in the exclusion of embryologyfrom the Modern Synthesis. This encourages acharacterization of evolutionary developmentalbiology as (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Tim Marsh & Simon Boag (2013). Evolutionary and Differential Psychology: Conceptual Conflicts and the Path to Integration. Frontiers in Psychology 4.score: 66.0
    Evolutionary psychology has seen the majority of its success exploring adaptive features of the mind believed to be ubiquitous across our species. This has given rise to the belief that the adaptationist approach has little to offer the field of differential psychology, which concerns itself exclusively with the ways in which individuals systematically differ. By framing the historical origins of both disciplines, and exploring the means through which they each address the unique challenges of psychological description and explanation, the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Alan Love, Evolutionary Morphology, Innovation, and the Synthesis of Evolution and Development.score: 62.0
    One foundational question in contemporary biology is how to integrate evolution and development. The emerging synthesis (evolutionary developmental biology or ‘evo-devo’) requires a meshing of disciplines, concepts, and explanations (inter alia) that have been developed largely in independence over the past century. The nature of the hoped for synthesis is not wholly agreed upon due to divergent viewpoints resulting from this disciplinary independence and, consequently, the mechanics for accomplishing the task are not clearly specified. This paper utilizes historical investigation (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Bernd Rosslenbroich (2009). The Theory of Increasing Autonomy in Evolution: A Proposal for Understanding Macroevolutionary Innovations. Biology and Philosophy 24 (5):623-644.score: 60.0
    Attempts to explain the origin of macroevolutionary innovations have been only partially successful. Here it is proposed that the patterns of major evolutionary transitions have to be understood first, before it is possible to further analyse the forces behind the process. The hypothesis is that major evolutionary innovations are characterized by an increase in organismal autonomy, in the sense of emancipation from the environment. After a brief overview of the literature on this subject, increasing autonomy is (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. H. G. Callaway (1996). Review: Carl R. Hausman, Charles S. Peirce's Evolutionary Philosophy. [REVIEW] Dialectica 50 (No. 2):153-161.score: 54.0
    Carl Hausman is a former editor of The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, a revival of one of the first American philosophy journals, where Peirce published some of his early work; and Hausman has devoted a good deal of his career to Peirce scholarship. He interprets Peirce’s thought “as a fallibilistic foundationalism that affirms a unique realism according to which what is real is a dynamic, evolving extramental condition.” The theme is an interesting one partly in view of the many recent (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Mark Bedau, Measurement of Evolutionary Activity, Teleology, and Life.score: 54.0
    We consider how to discern whether or not evolution is taking place in an observed system. Evolution will be characterized in terms of a particular macroscopic behavior that emerges from microscopic organismic interaction. We de ne evolutionary activity as the rate at which useful genetic innovations are absorbed into the population. After measuring evolutionary activity in a simple model biosphere, we discuss applications to other systems. We argue that evolutionary activity provides an objective, quantitative interpretation of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Mats E. Svensson & Alexander Haas (2005). Evolutionary Innovation in the Vertebrate Jaw: A Derived Morphology in Anuran Tadpoles and its Possible Developmental Origin. Bioessays 27 (5):526-532.score: 50.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. T. Lewens (2002). Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process Darwinnovation! Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):195-203.score: 40.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Pieter E. Vermaas (2002). Technological Innovation as an Unusual and Non-Biological Evolutionary Process. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 33 (4):735-739.score: 40.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. E. P. (2002). Technological Innovation as an Unusual and Non-Biological Evolutionary Process - John Ziman (Ed.) Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, XVII + 379 Pp., Hardback, ISBN 0-521-62361-. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 33 (4):735-739.score: 40.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Pieter E. Vermaas (2002). Technological Innovation as an Unusual and Non-Biological Evolutionary Process: John Ziman (Ed.) Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, Xvii+ 379 Pp., Hardback, ISBN 0-521-62361-8. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 33 (4):735-739.score: 40.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Philippe Huneman (2008). Emergence and Adaptation. Minds and Machines 18 (4):493-520.score: 36.0
    I investigate the relationship between adaptation, as defined in evolutionary theory through natural selection, and the concept of emergence. I argue that there is an essential correlation between the former, and “emergence” defined in the field of algorithmic simulations. I first show that the computational concept of emergence (in terms of incompressible simulation) can be correlated with a causal criterion of emergence (in terms of the specificity of the explanation of global patterns). On this ground, I argue that emergence (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. F. Galis (2001). Key Innovations and Radiations. In G. P. Wagner (ed.), The Character Concept in Evolutionary Biology. Academic Press. 581--605.score: 36.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Simon M. Reader (2007). Environmentally Invoked Innovation and Cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (4):420-421.score: 34.0
    Behavioral innovations induced by the social or physical environment are likely to be of great functional and evolutionary importance, and thus warrant serious attention. Innovation provides a process by which animals can adjust to changed environments. Despite this apparent adaptive advantage, it is not known whether innovative propensities are adaptive specializations. Furthermore, the varied psychological processes underlying innovation remain poorly understood.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Corina J. Logan & John W. Pepper (2007). Social Learning is Central to Innovation, in Primates and Beyond. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (4):416-417.score: 34.0
    Much of the importance of innovation stems from its capacity to spread via social learning, affecting multiple individuals, thus generating evolutionary and ecological consequences. We advocate a broader taxonomic focus in the field of behavioral innovation, as well as the use of comparative field research, and discuss the unique conservation implications of animal innovations and traditions.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Richard R. Nelson (2011). Human Behavior and Cognition in Evolutionary Economics. Biological Theory 6 (4):293-300.score: 34.0
    My brand of evolutionary economics recognizes, highlights, that modern economies are always in the process of changing, never fully at rest, with much of the energy coming from innovation. This perspective obviously draws a lot from Schumpeter. Continuing innovation, and the creative destruction that innovation engenders, is driving the system. There are winners and losers in the process, but generally the changes can be regarded as progress. The processes through which economic activity and performance evolve has a lot in (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Uwe Hoßfeld & Lennart Olsson (2003). The Road From Haeckel: The Jena Tradition in Evolutionary Morphology and the Origins of “Evo-Devo”. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):285-307.score: 30.0
    With Carl Gegenbaur and Ernst Haeckel, inspiredby Darwin and the cell theory, comparativeanatomy and embryology became established andflourished in Jena. This tradition wascontinued and developed further with new ideasand methods devised by some of Haeckelsstudents. This first period of innovative workin evolutionary morphology was followed byperiods of crisis and even a disintegration ofthe discipline in the early twentieth century.This stagnation was caused by a lack ofinterest among morphologists in Mendeliangenetics, and uncertainty about the mechanismsof evolution. Idealistic morphology was stillinfluental (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Kathia Laszlo, Alexander Laszlo, Carlos Romero & Marcia Campos (2003). Evolving Development: An Evolutionary Perspective on Development for an Interconnected World. World Futures 59 (2):105 – 119.score: 30.0
    The notion of development has been permeated by concepts and methods from positivistic science. As a result, many development initiatives are reductionistic, myopic, and with little or impact on the improvement of the quality of life and the sustainability of communities and societies. This article marks the beginning of a transdisciplinary inquiry among the authors, motivated by direct interest in the issue of development, per se, and in particular, Mexico's development. Our inquiry departs from and weaves together our various areas (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Kazuo Okanoya Shigeru Miyagawa, Robert C. Berwick (2013). The Emergence of Hierarchical Structure in Human Language. Frontiers in Psychology 4.score: 30.0
    We propose a novel account for the emergence of human language syntax. Like many evolutionary innovations, language arose from the adventitious combination of two pre-existing, simpler systems that had been evolved for other functional tasks. The first system, Type E(xpression), is found in birdsong, where it marks territory, mating availability, and similar ‘expressive’ functions. The second system, Type L(exical), has been suggestively found in non-human primate calls and in honeybee waggle dances, where it demarcates predicates with one or (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. E. Günter Schumacher & David M. Wasieleski (2013). Erratum To: Institutionalizing Ethical Innovation in Organizations: An Integrated Causal Model of Moral Innovation Decision Processes. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 113 (1):181-182.score: 28.0
    This article answers several calls—coming as well from corporate governance practitioners as from corporate governance researchers—concerning the possibility of complying simultaneously with requirements of innovation and ethics. Revealing the long-term orientation as the variable which permits us to link the principal goal of organization, being “survival,” with innovation and ethic, the article devises a framework for incorporating ethics into a company’s processes and strategies for innovation. With the principal goal of organizations being “survival” in the long-term, it is assumed that (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Christine Clavien (forthcoming). Evolution, Society, and Ethics: Social Darwinism Versus Evolutionary Ethics. In Thomas Heams (ed.), Handbook of Evolutionary Biology (provis. Title). Springer.score: 27.0
    Evolutionary ethics (EE) is a branch of philosophy that arouses both fascination and deep suspicion. It claims that Darwinian mechanisms and evolutionary data on animal sociality are relevant to ethical reflection. This field of study is often misunderstood and rarely fails to conjure up images of Social Darwinism as a vector for nasty ideologies and policies. However, it is worth resisting the temptation to reduce EE to Social Darwinism and developing an objective analysis of whether it is appropriate (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Massimo Pigliucci (2009). An Extended Synthesis for Evolutionary Biology. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1168:218-228.score: 24.0
    Evolutionary theory is undergoing an intense period of discussion and reevaluation. This, contrary to the misleading claims of creationists and other pseudoscientists, is no harbinger of a crisis but rather the opposite: the field is expanding dramatically in terms of both empirical discoveries and new ideas. In this essay I briefly trace the conceptual history of evolutionary theory from Darwinism to neo-Darwinism, and from the Modern Synthesis to what I refer to as the Extended Synthesis, a more inclusive (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Paul E. Griffiths & John S. Wilkins (forthcoming). When Do Evolutionary Explanations of Belief Debunk Belief? In Darwin in the 21st Century.score: 24.0
    Ever since Darwin people have worried about the sceptical implications of evolution. If our minds are products of evolution like those of other animals, why suppose that the beliefs they produce are true, rather than merely useful? In this chapter we apply this argument to beliefs in three different domains: morality, religion, and science. We identify replies to evolutionary scepticism that work in some domains but not in others. The simplest reply to evolutionary scepticism is that the truth (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Massimo Pigliucci (2006). Genetic Variance–Covariance Matrices: A Critique of the Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics Research Program. Biology and Philosophy 21 (1):1-23.score: 24.0
    This paper outlines a critique of the use of the genetic variance–covariance matrix (G), one of the central concepts in the modern study of natural selection and evolution. Specifically, I argue that for both conceptual and empirical reasons, studies of G cannot be used to elucidate so-called constraints on natural selection, nor can they be employed to detect or to measure past selection in natural populations – contrary to what assumed by most practicing biologists. I suggest that the search for (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Massimo Pigliucci (2008). What, If Anything, is an Evolutionary Novelty? Philosophy of Science 75 (5):887-898.score: 24.0
    The idea of phenotypic novelty appears throughout the evolutionary literature. Novelties have been defined so broadly as to make the term meaningless and so narrowly as to apply only to a limited number of spectacular structures. Here I examine some of the available definitions of phenotypic novelty and argue that the modern synthesis is ill equipped at explaining novelties. I then discuss three frameworks that may help biologists get a better insight of how novelties arise during evolution but warn (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. John S. Wilkins & Paul E. Griffiths (forthcoming). Evolutionary Debunking Arguments in Three Domains: Fact, Value, and Religion. In James Maclaurin Greg Dawes (ed.), A New Science of Religion. Routledge.score: 24.0
    Ever since Darwin people have worried about the sceptical implications of evolution. If our minds are products of evolution like those of other animals, why suppose that the beliefs they produce are true, rather than merely useful? We consider this problem for beliefs in three different domains: religion, morality, and commonsense and scientific claims about matters of empirical fact. We identify replies to evolutionary scepticism that work in some domains but not in others. One reply is that evolution can (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Geoff Childers (2011). What's Wrong with the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism? International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):193-204.score: 24.0
    Alvin Plantinga has argued that evolutionary naturalism (the idea that God does not tinker with evolution) undermines its own rationality. Natural selection is concerned with survival and reproduction, and false beliefs conjoined with complementary motivational drives could serve the same aims as true beliefs. Thus, argues Plantinga, if we believe we evolved naturally, we should not think our beliefs are, on average, likely to be true, including our beliefs in evolution and naturalism. I argue herein that our cognitive faculties (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Erik J. Wielenberg (2010). On the Evolutionary Debunking of Morality. Ethics 120 (3):441-464.score: 24.0
    Evolutionary debunkers of morality hold this thesis: If S’s moral belief that P can be given an evolutionary explanation, then S’s moral belief that P is not knowledge. In this paper, I debunk a variety of arguments for this thesis. I first sketch a possible evolutionary explanation for some human moral beliefs. Next, I explain how, given a reliabilist approach to warrant, my account implies that humans possess moral knowledge. Finally, I examine the debunking arguments of Michael (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Massimo Pigliucci (2007). Do We Need an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis? Evolution 61 (12):2743-2749.score: 24.0
    The Modern Synthesis (MS) is the current paradigm in evolutionary biology. It was actually built by expanding on the conceptual foundations laid out by its predecessors, Darwinism and neo-Darwinism. For sometime now there has been talk of a new Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES), and this article begins to outline why we may need such an extension, and how it may come about. As philosopher Karl Popper has noticed, the current evolutionary theory is a theory of genes, and (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Justin Clarke-Doane (2012). Morality and Mathematics: The Evolutionary Challenge. Ethics 122 (2):313-340.score: 24.0
    It is commonly suggested that evolutionary considerations generate an epistemological challenge for moral realism. At first approximation, the challenge for the moral realist is to explain our having many true moral beliefs, given that those beliefs are the products of evolutionary forces that would be indifferent to the moral truth. An important question surrounding this challenge is the extent to which it generalizes. In particular, it is of interest whether the Evolutionary Challenge for moral realism is equally (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Massimo Pigliucci (2002). Are Ecology and Evolutionary Biology “Soft” Sciences? Annales Zoologici Finnici 39:87-98.score: 24.0
    Research in ecology and evolutionary biology (evo-eco) often tries to emulate the “hard” sciences such as physics and chemistry, but to many of its practitioners feels more like the “soft” sciences of psychology and sociology. I argue that this schizophrenic attitude is the result of lack of appreciation of the full consequences of the peculiarity of the evo-eco sciences as lying in between a-historical disciplines such as physics and completely historical ones as like paleontology. Furthermore, evo-eco researchers have gotten (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Antti Revonsuo (2000). The Reinterpretation of Dreams: An Evolutionary Hypothesis of the Function of Dreaming. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (6):877-901.score: 24.0
    Several theories claim that dreaming is a random by-product of REM sleep physiology and that it does not serve any natural function. Phenomenal dream content, however, is not as disorganized as such views imply. The form and content of dreams is not random but organized and selective: during dreaming, the brain constructs a complex model of the world in which certain types of elements, when compared to waking life, are underrepresented whereas others are over represented. Furthermore, dream content is consistently (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Helen De Cruz & Johan De Smedt (2013). Reformed and Evolutionary Epistemology and the Noetic Effects of Sin. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 74 (1):49-66.score: 24.0
    Despite their divergent metaphysical assumptions, Reformed and evolutionary epistemologists have converged on the notion of proper basicality. Where Reformed epistemologists appeal to God, who has designed the mind in such a way that it successfully aims at the truth, evolutionary epistemologists appeal to natural selection as a mechanism that favors truth-preserving cognitive capacities. This paper investigates whether Reformed and evolutionary epistemological accounts of theistic belief are compatible. We will argue that their chief incompatibility lies in the noetic (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Darrell P. Rowbottom (2010). Evolutionary Epistemology and the Aim of Science. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (2):209-225.score: 24.0
    Both Popper and van Fraassen have used evolutionary analogies to defend their views on the aim of science, although these are diametrically opposed. By employing Price's equation in an illustrative capacity, this paper considers which view is better supported. It shows that even if our observations and experimental results are reliable, an evolutionary analogy fails to demonstrate why conjecture and refutation should result in: (1) the isolation of true theories; (2) successive generations of theories of increasing truth-likeness; (3) (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Massimo Pigliucci & Leonard Finkelman (2014). The Extended (Evolutionary) Synthesis Debate: Where Science Meets Philosophy. BioScience:online.score: 24.0
    Recent debates between proponents of the modern evolutionary synthesis (the standard model in evolutionary biology) and those of a possible extended synthesis are a good example of the fascinating tangle among empirical, theoretical, and conceptual or philosophical matters that is the practice of evolutionary biology. In this essay, we briefly discuss two case studies from this debate, highlighting the relevance of philosophical thinking to evolutionary biologists in the hope of spurring further constructive cross-pollination between the two (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Ronald Mallon & Stephen P. Stich (2000). The Odd Couple: The Compatibility of Social Construction and Evolutionary Psychology. Philosophy of Science 67 (1):133-154.score: 24.0
    Evolutionary psychology and social constructionism are widely regarded as fundamentally irreconcilable approaches to the social sciences. Focusing on the study of the emotions, we argue that this appearance is mistaken. Much of what appears to be an empirical disagreement between evolutionary psychologists and social constructionists over the universality or locality of emotional phenomena is actually generated by an implicit philosophical dispute resulting from the adoption of different theories of meaning and reference. We argue that once this philosophical dispute (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. David J. Buller & Valerie Gray Hardcastle (2000). Evolutionary Psychology, Meet Developmental Neurobiology: Against Promiscuous Modularity. [REVIEW] Brain and Mind 1 (3):307-25.score: 24.0
    Evolutionary psychologists claim that the mind contains “hundreds or thousands” of “genetically specified” modules, which are evolutionary adaptations for their cognitive functions. We argue that, while the adult human mind/brain typically contains a degree of modularization, its “modules” are neither genetically specified nor evolutionary adaptations. Rather, they result from the brain’s developmental plasticity, which allows environmental task demands a large role in shaping the brain’s information-processing structures. The brain’s developmental plasticity is our fundamental psychological adaptation, and the (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Ehud Lamm & Eva Jablonka (2008). The Nurture of Nature: Hereditary Plasticity in Evolution. Philosophical Psychology 21 (3):305 – 319.score: 24.0
    The dichotomy between Nature and Nurture, which has been dismantled within the framework of development, remains embodied in the notions of plasticity and evolvability. We argue that plasticity and evolvability, like development and heredity, are neither dichotomous nor distinct: the very same mechanisms may be involved in both, and the research perspective chosen depends to a large extent on the type of problem being explored and the kinds of questions being asked. Epigenetic inheritance leads to transgenerationally extended plasticity, and developmentally-induced (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Massimo Pigliucci (2013). The Nature of Evolutionary Biology: At the Borderlands Between Historical and Experimental Science. In Kostas Kampourakis (ed.), The Philosophy of Biology: A Companion for Educators. Springer.score: 24.0
    The scientific status of evolutionary theory seems to be more or less perennially under question. I am not referring here (just) to the silliness of young Earth creation- ism (Pigliucci 2002; Boudry and Braeckman 2010), or even of the barely more intel- lectually sophisticated so-called Intelligent Design theory (Recker 2010; Brigandt this volume), but rather to discussions among scientists and philosophers of science concerning the epistemic status of evolutionary theory (Sober 2010). As we shall see in what follows, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Massimo Pigliucci (2003). Genetic Assimilation and a Possible Evolutionary Paradox: Can Macroevolution Sometimes Be so Fast to Pass Us By? Evolution 57 (7):1455-1464.score: 24.0
    The idea of genetic assimilation, that environmentally induced phenotypes may become genetically fixed and no longer require the original environmental stimulus, has had varied success through time in evolutionary biology research. Proposed by Waddington in the 1940s, it became an area of active empirical research mostly thanks to the efforts of its inventor and his collaborators. It was then attacked as of minor importance during the ‘‘hardening’’ of the neo-Darwinian synthesis and was relegated to a secondary role for decades. (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Steven D. Hales (2009). Moral Relativism and Evolutionary Psychology. Synthese 166 (2):431 - 447.score: 24.0
    I argue that evolutionary strategies of kin selection and game-theoretic reciprocity are apt to generate agent-centered and agent- neutral moral intuitions, respectively. Such intuitions are the building blocks of moral theories, resulting in a fundamental schism between agent-centered theories on the one hand and agent-neutral theories on the other. An agent-neutral moral theory is one according to which everyone has the same duties and moral aims, no matter what their personal interests or interpersonal relationships. Agent-centered moral theories deny this (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Omar Mirza (2008). A User's Guide to the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. Philosophical Studies 141 (2):125 - 146.score: 24.0
    Alvin Plantinga has famously argued that metaphysical naturalism is self-defeating, and cannot be rationally accepted. I distinguish between two different ways of understanding this argument, which I call the "probabilistic inference conception", and the "process characteristic conception". I argue that the former is what critics of the argument usually presuppose, whereas most critical responses fail when one assumes the latter conception. To illustrate this, I examine three standard objections to Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism: the Perspiration Objection, the Tu (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Stavros Ioannidis (2013). Regulatory Evolution and Theoretical Arguments in Evolutionary Biology. Science and Education 22 (2):279-292.score: 24.0
    The cis-regulatory hypothesis is one of the most important claims of evolutionary developmental biology. In this paper I examine the theoretical argument for cis-regulatory evolution and its role within evolutionary theorizing. I show that, although the argument has some weaknesses, it acts as a useful example for the importance of current scientific debates for science education.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000