8 found
Order:
  1. Alfonso Arroyo-Santos, Mark E. Olson & Francisco Vergara-Silva (2015). Practice Oriented Controversies and Borrowed Epistemic Support in Current Evolutionary Biology. The Case of Phylogeography. Perspectives on Science 23 (3):310-334.
    Philosophical treatments of scientific controversies usually focus on theory, excluding important practice related aspects. However, scientists in conflict often appeal to extra-theoretical and extra-empirical elements. To understand better the role that non-empirical elements play in scientific controversies, we introduce the notion of borrowed epistemic credibility, illustrating our proposal with a recent controversy in a field of evolutionary biology known as phylogeography. Our analysis shows how scientific controversies that spring from disagreements about methodological issues potentially involve deeperdebates regarding whatconstitutes good science, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  55
    Alfonso Arroyo-Santos, Mark E. Olson & Francisco Vergara-Silva (2013). The Phylogeography Debate and the Epistemology of Model-Based Evolutionary Biology. Biology and Philosophy 29 (6):833-850.
    Phylogeography, a relatively new subdicipline of evolutionary biology that attempts to unify the fields of phylogenetics and population biology in an explicit geographical context, has hosted in recent years a highly polarized debate related to the purported benefits and limitations that qualitative versus quantitative methods might contribute or impose on inferential processes in evolutionary biology. Here we present a friendly, non-technical introduction to the conflicting methods underlying the controversy, and exemplify it with a balanced selection of quotes from the primary (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  3.  10
    Alfonso Arroyo-Santos, Mark E. Olson & Francisco Vergara-Silva (2015). Practice-Oriented Controversies and Borrowed Epistemic Credibility in Current Evolutionary Biology: Phylogeography as a Case Study. Perspectives on Science 25 (3):310-334.
    Philosophical treatments of scientific controversies usually focus on theory, excluding important practice related aspects. However, scientists in conflict often appeal to extra-theoretical and extra-empirical elements. To understand better the role that non-empirical elements play in scientific controversies, we introduce the notion of borrowed epistemic credibility, illustrating our proposal with a recent controversy in a field of evolutionary biology known as phylogeography. Our analysis shows how scientific controversies that spring from disagreements about methodological issues potentially involve deeper debates regarding what constitutes (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  28
    Francisco Vergara-Silva (2003). Plants and the Conceptual Articulation of Evolutionary Developmental Biology. Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):249-284.
  5.  9
    Alfonso Arroyo-Santos, Mark E. Olson & Francisco Vergara-Silva (2014). Practice-Oriented Controversies and Borrowed Epistemic Support in Current Evolutionary Biology: Phylogeography as a Case Study. Biology and Philosophy 29:833-850.
    Although there is increasing recognition that theory and practice in science are often inseparably intertwined, discussions of scientific controversies often continue to focus on theory, and not practice or methodologies. As a contribution to constructing a framework towards understanding controversies linked to scientific practices, we introduce the notion of borrowed epistemic credibility, to describe the situation in which scientists exploit fallacious similarities between accepted tenets in other fields to garner support for a given position in their own field. Our proposal (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  58
    Francisco Vergara-Silva (2009). Pattern Cladistics and the ‘Realism–Antirealism Debate’ in the Philosophy of Biology. Acta Biotheoretica 57 (1-2):269-294.
    Despite the amount of work that has been produced on the subject over the years, the ‘transformation of cladistics’ is still a misunderstood episode in the history of comparative biology. Here, I analyze two outstanding, highly contrasting historiographic accounts on the matter, under the perspective of an influential dichotomy in the philosophy of science: the opposition between Scientific Realism and Empiricism. Placing special emphasis on the notion of ‘causal grounding’ of morphological characters in modern developmental biology’s theories, I arrive at (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  74
    Francisco Vergara-Silva & Rasmus Grønfeldt Winther (2009). Editorial: Systematics, Darwinism, and the Philosophy of Science. Acta Biotheoretica 57 (1-2):1-3.
  8. Francisco Vergara-Silva (2009). Editorial: From a Biological Point of View. Acta Biotheoretica 57 (1-2):163-169.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography