11 found
Sort by:
  1. Gillian Barker & John Odling-Smee (2013). Integrating Ecology and Evolution: Niche Construction and Ecological Engineering. In Gillian Barker, Eric Desjardins & Trevor Pearce (eds.), Entangled Life: Organism and Environment in the Biological and Social Sciences. Springer. 187-211.
  2. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee, William Hoppitt & Tobias Uller (2013). More on How and Why: Cause and Effect in Biology Revisited. Biology and Philosophy 28 (5):719-745.
    In 1961, Ernst Mayr published a highly influential article on the nature of causation in biology, in which he distinguished between proximate and ultimate causes. Mayr argued that proximate causes (e.g. physiological factors) and ultimate causes (e.g. natural selection) addressed distinct ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions and were not competing alternatives. That distinction retains explanatory value today. However, the adoption of Mayr’s heuristic led to the widespread belief that ontogenetic processes are irrelevant to evolutionary questions, a belief that has (1) hindered (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee, William Hoppitt & Tobias Uller (2013). More on How and Why: A Response to Commentaries. Biology and Philosophy 28 (5):793-810.
    We are grateful to the commentators for taking the time to respond to our article. Too many interesting and important points have been raised for us to tackle them all in this response, and so in the below we have sought to draw out the major themes. These include problems with both the term ‘ultimate causation’ and the proximate-ultimate causation dichotomy more generally, clarification of the meaning of reciprocal causation, discussion of issues related to the nature of development and phenotypic (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. John Odling-Smee & Kevin N. Laland (2011). Ecological Inheritance and Cultural Inheritance: What Are They and How Do They Differ? Biological Theory 6 (3):220-230.
  5. John Odling-Smee & J. Scott Turner (2011). Niche Construction Theory and Human Architecture. Biological Theory 6 (3):283-289.
  6. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee, Marcus W. Feldman & Jeremy Kendal (2009). Conceptual Barriers to Progress Within Evolutionary Biology. Foundations of Science 14 (3):195-216.
    In spite of its success, Neo-Darwinism is faced with major conceptual barriers to further progress, deriving directly from its metaphysical foundations. Most importantly, neo-Darwinism fails to recognize a fundamental cause of evolutionary change, “niche construction”. This failure restricts the generality of evolutionary theory, and introduces inaccuracies. It also hinders the integration of evolutionary biology with neighbouring disciplines, including ecosystem ecology, developmental biology, and the human sciences. Ecology is forced to become a divided discipline, developmental biology is stubbornly difficult to reconcile (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. John Odling-Smee (2007). Niche Inheritance: A Possible Basis for Classifying Multiple Inheritance Systems in Evolution. Biological Theory 2 (3):276-289.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee & Marcus W. Feldman (2005). On the Breadth and Significance of Niche Construction: A Reply to Griffiths, Okasha and Sterelny. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 20 (1):37-55.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. John Odling-Smee (2002). Complex Life: Nonmodernity and the Emergence of Cognition and Culture. By Alan Dean. Pp. 149. (Ashgate, Aldershot, 2000.) £38.50, ISBN 0-7546-1049-7, Hardback. [REVIEW] Journal of Biosocial Science 34 (4):559-564.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee & Marcus W. Feldman (2000). Niche Construction, Biological Evolution, and Cultural Change. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (1):131-146.
    We propose a conceptual model that maps the causal pathways relating biological evolution to cultural change. It builds on conventional evolutionary theory by placing emphasis on the capacity of organisms to modify sources of natural selection in their environment (niche construction) and by broadening the evolutionary dynamic to incorporate ontogenetic and cultural processes. In this model, phenotypes have a much more active role in evolution than generally conceived. This sheds light on hominid evolution, on the evolution of culture, and on (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Kevin N. Laland, John Odling-Smee & Marcus W. Feldman (2000). Niche Construction Earns its Keep. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (1):164-172.
    Our response contains a definition of niche construction, illustrations of how it changes the evolutionary process, and clarifications of our conceptual model. We argue that the introduction of niche construction into evolutionary thinking earns its keep; we illustrate this argument in our discussion of rates of genetic and cultural evolution, memes and phenogenotypes, creativity, the EEA (environment of evolutionary adaptedness), and group selection.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation