Search results for 'Species Differences' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Gary B. Glavin & George P. Vincent (1979). Species Differences in Restraint-Induced Gastric Ulcers. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 14 (5):351-352.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jon H. Kaas (1988). Determining Species Differences in Numbers of Cortical Areas and Modules: The Architectonic Method Needs Supplementation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11 (1):96.score: 45.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. James W. Kalat (1987). Species Differences in Intelligence: Which Null Hypothesis? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (4):671.score: 45.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. A. W. Logue (1981). Species Differences and Principles of Learning: Informed Generality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4 (1):150.score: 45.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Neil Rowland (1979). Natural Drinking, Interactions with Feeding, and Species Differences - Three Data Deserts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2 (1):117-118.score: 45.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Gerald E. Schneider (1984). Axon Development and Plasticity: Clues From Species Differences and Suggestions for Mechanisms of Evolutionary Change. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7 (3):346.score: 45.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. David Lubinski & Travis Thompson (1993). Species and Individual Differences in Communication Based on Private States. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (4):627.score: 42.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Bernard J. Baars (2001). There Are No Known Differences in Brain Mechanisms of Consciousness Between Humans and Other Mammals. Animal Welfare Supplement 10:31- 40.score: 39.0
  9. Guy Madison (2009). Human Female Exogamy is Supported by Cross-Species Comparisons: Cause to Recognise Sex Differences in Societal Policy? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (5):400-400.score: 39.0
    A sex difference in the tendency to outbreed (female exogamy) is a premise for the target article's proposed framework, which receives some support by being shared with chimpanzees but not with more distantly related primates. Further empirical support is provided, and it is suggested that recognition of sex differences might improve effective fairness, taking sexual assault as a case in point.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. B. Bermond (2001). A Neuropsychological and Evolutionary Approach to Animal Consciousness and Animal Suffering. Animal Welfare Supplement 10:47- 62.score: 30.0
  11. Julia Tanner (2011). The Argument From Marginal Cases: Is Species a Relevant Difference. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 11 (32):225-235.score: 30.0
    Marginal humans are not rational yet we still think they are morally considerable. This is inconsistent with denying animals moral status on the basis of their irrationality. Therefore, either marginal humans and animals are both morally considerable or neither are. In this paper I consider a major objection to this argument: that species is a relevant difference between humans animals.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. S. Kuczaj, K. Tranel, M. Trone & H. Hamner Hill (2001). Are Animals Capable of Deception or Empathy? Implications for Animal Consciousness and Animal Welfare. Animal Welfare. Special Issue 10:161- 173.score: 30.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. John C. Marshall, Gereon R. Fink, Peter W. Halligan & Giuseppe Vallar (2002). Spatial Awareness: A Function of the Posterior Parietal Lobe? Cortex 38 (2):253-257.score: 30.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. John G. Taylor (2001). What Do Neuronal Network Models of the Mind Indicate About Animal Consciousness? Animal Welfare Supplement 10:63- 75.score: 30.0
  15. Lawrence Weiskrantz (2001). Commentary Responses and Conscious Awareness in Humans: The Implications for Awareness in Non-Human Animals. Animal Welfare. Special Issue 10:41- 46.score: 30.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Hans-Otto Karnath, Susanne Ferber & Marc Himmelbach (2001). Spatial Awareness is a Function of the Temporal Not the Posterior Parietal Lobe. Nature 411 (6840):951-953.score: 30.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. B. M. Spruijt (2001). How the Hierarchical Organization of the Brain and Increasing Cognitive Abilities May Result in Consciousness. Animal Welfare Supplement 10:77- 87.score: 30.0
  18. Euan M. Macphail (1987). The Comparative Psychology of Intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (4):645.score: 30.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Massimo Pigliucci (2003). Species as Family Resemblance Concepts: The (Dis-)Solution of the Species Problem? BioEssays 25 (6):596-602.score: 27.0
    The so-called ‘‘species problem’’ has plagued evolution- ary biology since before Darwin’s publication of the aptly titled Origin of Species. Many biologists think the problem is just a matter of semantics; others complain that it will not be solved until we have more empirical data. Yet, we don’t seem to be able to escape discussing it and teaching seminars about it. In this paper, I briefly examine the main themes of the biological and philosophical liter- atures on the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Marc Ereshefsky (2010). Darwin's Solution to the Species Problem. Synthese 175 (3):405 - 425.score: 21.0
    Biologists and philosophers that debate the existence of the species category fall into two camps. Some believe that the species category does not exist and the term 'species' should be eliminated from biology. Others believe that with new biological insights or the application of philosophical ideas, we can be confident that the species category exists. This paper offers a different approach to the species problem. We should be skeptical of the species category, but not (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Joel Cracraft (1987). Species Concepts and the Ontology of Evolution. Biology and Philosophy 2 (3):329-346.score: 21.0
    Biologists and philosophers have long recognized the importance of species, yet species concepts serve two masters, evolutionary theory on the one hand and taxonomy on the other. Much of present-day evolutionary and systematic biology has confounded these two roles primarily through use of the biological species concept. Theories require entities that are real, discrete, irreducible, and comparable. Within the neo-Darwinian synthesis, however, biological species have been treated as real or subjectively delimited entities, discrete or nondiscrete, and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Matthew J. Barker & Robert A. Wilson (2010). Cohesion, Gene Flow, and the Nature of Species. Journal of Philosophy 107 (2):59-77.score: 21.0
    A far-reaching and influential view in evolutionary biology claims that species are cohesive units held together by gene flow. Biologists have recognized empirical problems facing this view; after sharpening the expression of the view, we present novel conceptual problems for it. At the heart of these problems is a distinction between two importantly different concepts of cohesion, what we call integrative and response cohesion. Acknowledging the distinction problematizes both the explanandum of species cohesion and the explanans of gene (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Sarah S. Richardson (2010). Sexes, Species, and Genomes: Why Males and Females Are Not Like Humans and Chimpanzees. Biology and Philosophy 25 (5):823-841.score: 21.0
    This paper describes, analyzes, and critiques the construction of separate male and female genomes in current human genome research. Comparative genomic work on human sex differences conceives of the sexes as like different species, with different genomes. I argue that this construct is empirically unsound, distortive to research, and ethically questionable. I propose a conceptual model of biological sex that clarifies the distinction between species and sexes as genetic classes. The dynamic interdependence of the sexes makes them (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. John S. Wilkins (2003). How to Be a Chaste Species Pluralist-Realist: The Origins of Species Modes and the Synapomorphic Species Concept. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 18 (5):621-638.score: 21.0
    The biological species (biospecies) concept applies only to sexually reproducing species, which means that until sexual reproduction evolved, there were no biospecies. On the universal tree of life, biospecies concepts therefore apply only to a relatively small number of clades, notably plants andanimals. I argue that it is useful to treat the various ways of being a species (species modes) as traits of clades. By extension from biospecies to the other concepts intended to capture the natural (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Jacob Metcalf (2008). Intimacy Without Proximity: Encountering Griz as a Companion Species. Environmental Philosophy 5 (2):99-128.score: 21.0
    Using grizzly-human encounters as a case study, this paper argues for a rethinking of the differences between humans and animals within en- vironmental ethics. A diffractive approach that understands such dif- ferences as an effect of specific material and discursive arrangements (rather than as pre-settled and oppositional) would see ethics as an interrogation of which arrangements enable flourishing, or living and dying well. The paper draws on a wide variety of human-grizzly encoun- ters in order to describe the (...) as co-constitutive and challenges perspectives that treat bears and other animals as oppositional and non- agential outsides to humans. -/- . (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Brent D. Mishler & Robert N. Brandon (1987). Individuality, Pluralism, and the Phylogenetic Species Concept. Biology and Philosophy 2 (4):397-414.score: 21.0
    The concept of individuality as applied to species, an important advance in the philosophy of evolutionary biology, is nevertheless in need of refinement. Four important subparts of this concept must be recognized: spatial boundaries, temporal boundaries, integration, and cohesion. Not all species necessarily meet all of these. Two very different types of pluralism have been advocated with respect to species, only one of which is satisfactory. An often unrecognized distinction between grouping and ranking components of any (...) concept is necessary. A phylogenetic species concept is advocated that uses a (monistic) grouping criterion of monophyly in a cladistic sense, and a (pluralistic) ranking criterion based on those causal processes that are most important in producing and maintaining lineages in a particular case. Such causal processes can include actual interbreeding, selective constraints, and developmental canalization. The widespread use of the biological species concept is flawed for two reasons: because of a failure to distinguish grouping from ranking criteria and because of an unwarranted emphasis on the importance of interbreeding as a universal causal factor controlling evolutionary diversification. The potential to interbreed is not in itself a process; it is instead a result of a diversity of processes which result in shared selective environments and common developmental programs. These types of processes act in both sexual and asexual organisms, thus the phylogenetic species concept can reflect an underlying unity that the biological species concept can not. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Julia Tanner (2008). Species as a Relationship. Acta Analytica 23 (4):337-347.score: 21.0
    The fact that humans have a special relationship to each other insofar as they belong in the same species is often taken to be a morally relevant difference between humans and other animals, one which justifies a greater moral status for all humans, regardless of their individual capacities. I give some reasons why this kind of relationship is not an appropriate ground for differential treatment of humans and nonhumans. I then argue that even if relationships do matter morally (...) membership cannot justify a difference in moral status. This has important implications because it removes one barrier to giving animals greater moral status. (shrink)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Michael Lee & Mieczyslaw Wolsan (2002). Integration, Individuality and Species Concepts. Biology and Philosophy 17 (5):651-660.score: 21.0
    Integration (interaction among parts of an entity) is suggested to be necessary for individuality (contra, Metaphysics and the Origin of Species). A synchronic species is an integrated individual that can evolve as a unified whole; a diachronic lineage is a non-integrated historical entity that cannot evolve. Synchronic species and diachronic lineages are consequently suggested to be ontologically distinct entities, rather than alternative perspectives of the same underlying entity (contra Baum (1998), Syst. Biol. 47, 641–653; de Queiroz (1995), (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Thomas A. C. Reydon (2008). Species in Three and Four Dimensions. Synthese 164 (2):161 - 184.score: 21.0
    There is an interesting parallel between two debates in different domains of contemporary analytic philosophy. One is the endurantism–<span class='Hi'>perdurantism</span>, or three-dimensionalism vs. four-dimensionalism, debate in analytic metaphysics. The other is the debate on the species problem in philosophy of biology. In this paper I attempt to cross-fertilize these debates with the aim of exploiting some of the potential that the two debates have to advance each other. I address two issues. First, I explore what the case of (...) implies regarding the feasibility of particular positions in the endurantism– <span class='Hi'>perdurantism</span> debate. I argue that the case of species casts doubt on the recent claim that three-dimensionalism and four-dimensionalism are equivalent descriptions of the same underlying reality. Second, and conversely, I examine whether the metaphysical worry about three-dimensionalism and four-dimensionalism can help us to better understand the nature of biological species. I show that analyzing the thesis that species are individuals against the background of the endurantism–<span class='Hi'>perdurantism</span> debate allows us to explicate two different ways in which this thesis can be interpreted. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Julio A. Camargo (2008). Revisiting the Relation Between Species Diversity and Information Theory. Acta Biotheoretica 56 (4).score: 21.0
    The Shannon information function (H) has been extensively used in ecology as a statistic of species diversity. Yet, the use of Shannon diversity index has also been criticized, mainly because of its ambiguous ecological interpretation and because of its relatively great sensitivity to the relative abundances of species in the community. In my opinion, the major shortcoming of the traditional perspective (on the possible relation of species diversity with information theory) is that species need for an (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. David N. Stamos (2002). Species, Languages, and the Horizontal/Vertical Distinction. Biology and Philosophy 17 (2):171-198.score: 21.0
    In addition to the distinction between species as a category and speciesas a taxon, the word species is ambiguous in a very different butequally important way, namely the temporal distinction between horizontal andvertical species. Although often found in the relevant literature, thisdistinction has thus far remained vague and undefined. In this paper the use ofthe distinction is explored, an attempt is made to clarify and define it, andthen the relation between the two dimensions and the implications of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Richard A. Richards (2010). The Species Problem: A Philosophical Analysis. Cambridge University Press.score: 21.0
    There is long-standing disagreement among systematists about how to divide biodiversity into species. Over twenty different species concepts are used to group organisms, according to criteria as diverse as morphological or molecular similarity, interbreeding and genealogical relationships. This, combined with the implications of evolutionary biology, raises the worry that either there is no single kind of species, or that species are not real. This book surveys the history of thinking about species from Aristotle to modern (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David C. Geary (1998). Sexual Selection, the Division of Labor, and the Evolution of Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):444-447.score: 21.0
    Sexual selection traditionally involves male-male competition and female choice, but in some species, including humans, sexual selection can also involve female-female competition and male choice. The degree to which one aspect of sexual selection or another is manifest in human populations will be influenced by a host of social and ecological variables, including the operational sex ratio. These variables are discussed in connection with the relative contribution of sexual selection and the division of labor to the evolution of human (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Joseph LaPorte (2003). Does a Type Specimen Necessarily or Contingently Belong to its Species? Biology and Philosophy 18 (4):583-588.score: 21.0
    In a recent article, Alex Levine raises a paradox. It appears that, given some relatively uncontroversial premises about how a species term comes to refer to its species, a type specimen belongs necessarily and contingently to its species. According to Levine, this problem arises if species are individuals rather than natural kinds. I argue that the problem can be generalized: the problem also arises if species are kinds and type specimens are paradigmatic members used to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Mahdi Muhammad Moosa & S. M. Minhaz Ud-Dean (2011). The Role of Dominance Hierarchy in the Evolution of Social Species. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41 (2):203-208.score: 21.0
    A number of animal species from different lineages live socially. One of the features of social living is the formation of dominance hierarchy. Despite its obvious benefit in the survival probability of the species, the hierarchical structureitself poses psychological and physiological burden leading to the chronic activation of stress related pathways. Considering these apparently conflicting observations, here we propose that social hierarchy can act as a selective force in the evolution of social species. We also discuss its (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Sarah F. Brosnan & Frans B. M. de Waal (2005). A Cross-Species Perspective on the Selfishness Axiom. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6):818-818.score: 21.0
    Henrich et al. describe an innovative research program investigating cross-cultural differences in the selfishness axiom (in economic games) in humans, yet humans are not the only species to show such variation. Chimpanzees and capuchin monkeys show signs of deviating from the standard self-interest paradigm in experimental settings by refusing to take foods that are less valuable than those earned by conspecifics, indicating that they, too, may pay attention to relative gains. However, it is less clear whether these (...) also show the other-regarding preferences seen in humans. (shrink)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Bruno Faivre & Pierre M. Auger (1993). Competition and Predation Models Applied to the Case of the Sibling Birds Species Ofhippolais in Burgundy. Acta Biotheoretica 41 (1-2).score: 21.0
    We study the case of two sibling species ofHippolais(Aves). Very little differences can be observed in the morphology of both species. The breeding area of these species are complementary. Roughly, one species breeds North and East of Europe (Hippolais icterina) while the other breeds South and West of Europe (Hippolais polyglotta). There exitst a narrow zone of sympatry passing through Burgundy. Since several years, it has been observed that this area of sympatry was moving in (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Kim Kleinman (2013). Systematics and the Origin of Species From the Viewpoint of a Botanist: Edgar Anderson Prepares the 1941 Jesup Lectures with Ernst Mayr. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 46 (1):73-101.score: 21.0
    The correspondence between Edgar Anderson and Ernst Mayr leading into their 1941 Jesup Lectures on “Systematics and the Origin of Species” addressed population thinking, the nature of species, the relationship of microevolution to macroevolution, and the evolutionary dynamics of plants and animals, all central issues in what came to be known as the Evolutionary Synthesis. On some points, they found ready agreement; for others they forged only a short term consensus. They brought two different working styles to this (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Hans-Rolf Gregorius (2011). The Analysis of Association Between Traits When Differences Between Trait States Matter. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (3):213-229.score: 21.0
    Because of their elementary significance in almost all fields of science, measures of association between two variables or traits are abundant and multiform. One aspect of association that is of considerable interest, especially in population genetics and ecology, seems to be widely ignored. This aspect concerns association between complex traits that show variable and arbitrarily defined state differences. Among such traits are genetic characters controlled by many and potentially polyploid loci, species characteristics, and environmental variables, all of which (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Stephen Jay Gould (1968). Trigonia and the Origin of Species. Journal of the History of Biology 1 (1):41 - 56.score: 21.0
    While the Trigonia story is a microcosmic representation of nineteenth-century evolutionary debates, it also serves as a model for assessing the impact of new empirical material upon a controversial issue potentially explained by several internally consistent but contradictory theories; for there can be no fact quite so pristine as a discovery anticipated by no one. The reaction to modern trigonians was, I suspect, completely typical; all parties to the dispute managed to incorporate the new datum into their systems. Evolutionists emphasized (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. M. Zisenis (2012). EU DAISIE Research Project: Wanted—Death Penalty to Keep Native Species Competitive? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (4):597-606.score: 21.0
    Neobiota as non-native species are commonly considered as alien species. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) intends to “prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate those alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species”. The European Union has financed the DAISIE research project for the first pan-European inventory of Invasive Alien Species (IAS), which is supposed to serve as a basis for prevention and control of biological invasions. This paper discusses the evaluation approach for classifying (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Christian Agrillo, Maria Elena Miletto Petrazzini, Christian Tagliapietra & Angelo Bisazza (2012). Inter-Specific Differences in Numerical Abilities Among Teleost Fish. Frontiers in Psychology 3.score: 21.0
    Adults, infants and non-human primates are thought to possess similar non-verbal numerical systems, but there is considerable debate regarding whether all vertebrates share the same numerical abilities. Despite an abundance of studies, cross-species comparison remains difficult because the methodology employed and the context of species examination vary considerably across studies. To fill this gap, we used the same procedure, stimuli and numerical contrasts to compare quantity abilities of five teleost fish: redtail splitfin, guppies, zebrafish, Siamese fighting fish, and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Popko P. Molen (1979). The Ethology of Inter-Individual Differences. Acta Biotheoretica 28 (2).score: 21.0
    In recent times psychologists have shown a growing interest in ethological methods of data collection. At the same time ethologists are showing a growing interest in the methods of data processing as developed in personality psychology. These methods of data processing appear to be most useful to ethological research when investigating differences between individuals. Using factor analysis of aggressive behaviour as an example, it is argued that an ethological approach which focusses on individual differences may add substantial information (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Hélène Bouchet, Catherine Blois-Heulin & Alban Lemasson (2013). Social Complexity Parallels Vocal Complexity: A Comparison of Three Non-Human Primate Species. Frontiers in Psychology 4.score: 21.0
    Social factors play a key role in the structuring of vocal repertoires at the individual level, notably in nonhuman primates. Some authors suggested that, at the species level too, social life may have driven the evolution of communicative complexity, but this has rarely been empirically tested. Here, we use a comparative approach to address this issue. We investigated vocal variability, at both the call type and the repertoire levels, in three forest-dwelling species of Cercopithecinae presenting striking differences (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Keith E. Stanovich & Richard F. West (2000). Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):645-665.score: 18.0
    Much research in the last two decades has demonstrated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision making and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be interpreted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. John S. Wilkins (2010). What is a Species? Essences and Generation. Theory in Biosciences 129:141-148.score: 18.0
    Arguments against essentialism in biology rely strongly on a claim that modern biology abandoned Aristotle's notion of a species as a class of necessary and sufficient properties. However, neither his theory of essentialism, nor his logical definition of species and genus (eidos and genos) play much of a role in biological research and taxonomy, including his own. The objections to natural kinds thinking by early twentieth century biologists wrestling with the new genetics overlooked the fact that species (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Michael T. Ghiselin (1974). A Radical Solution to the Species Problem. Systematic Zoology 23:536-44.score: 18.0
    Traditionally, species (like other taxa) have been treated as classes (universals). In fact they may be considered individuals (particular things). The logical term “individual” has been confused with a biological synonym for “organism.” If species are individuals, then: 1) their names are proper, 2) there cannot be instances of them, 3) they do not have defining properties (intensions), 4) their constituent organisms are parts, not members. “Species" may be defined as the most extensive units in the natural (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. John S. Wilkins (2007). The Dimensions, Modes and Definitions of Species and Speciation. Biology and Philosophy 22 (2):247-266.score: 18.0
    Speciation is an aspect of evolutionary biology that has received little philosophical attention apart from articles mainly by biologists such as Mayr (1988). The role of speciation as a terminus a quo for the individuality of species or in the context of punctuated equilibrium theory has been discussed, but not the nature of speciation events themselves. It is the task of this paper to attempt to bring speciation events into some kind of general scheme, based primarily upon the work (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Mark Sagoff (2005). Do Non-Native Species Threaten the Natural Environment? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):215-236.score: 18.0
    Conservation biologists and other environmentalists confront five obstacles in building support for regulatory policies that seek to exclude or remove introduced plants and other non-native species that threaten to harm natural areas or the natural environment. First, the concept of “harm to the natural environment” is nebulous and undefined. Second, ecologists cannot predict how introduced species will behave in natural ecosystems. If biologists cannot define “harm” or predict the behavior of introduced species, they must target all non-native (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Massimo Pigliucci (2005). Wittgenstein Solves (Posthumously) the Species Problem. Philosophy Now (Mar/Apr):51.score: 18.0
    Can Wittgenstein's famous family resemblance concept be applied to resolve the problem of defining species in biology?
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000