Skip to main content
Log in

The Return of the Replicator: What is Philosophically Significant in a General Account of Replication and Selection?

  • Discussion
  • Published:
Biology and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to outline a typologyof selection processes, and show that differentsub-categories have different explanatorypower. The basis of this typology of selectionprocesses is argued to be the difference ofreplication processes involved in them. Inorder to show this, I argue that: 1.Replication is necessary for selection and 2.Different types of replication lead todifferent types of selection. Finally, it isargued that this typology is philosophicallysignificant, since it contrasts cases ofselection (on the basis of the replicationprocesses involved in them) whereby selectioncauses adaptation – and, therefore, can beused in explanations of the (real or apparent)teleology of Nature – and cases in whichselection lacks such explanatory power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, P.R.: 1998, 'Hebb and Darwin', Journal of Theoretical Biology 195, 419-438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkow, J.H., Cosmides, L.M. and Tooby, J. (eds): 1992, The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedau, M.: 1991, 'Can Biological Teleology Be Naturalized?', Journal of Philosophy 88, 647-657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R.N.: 1996, Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M.: 1994, The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M.: 1995, 'Evolutionary Psychology: A New Paradigm for Psychological Science', Psychological Inquiry 6, 1-30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.: 1974, 'Evolutionary Epistemology', in P.A. Schilpp (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Open Court, LaSalle, pp. 413-463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Changeux, J.-P.: 1985, Neuronal Man: The Biology of Mind, Pantheon, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darden, L. and Cain, A.J.: 1989, 'Selection Type Theories', Philosophy of Science 56, 106-129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R.: 1976, The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R.: 1982, 'Replicators as Vehicles', reprinted in R.N. Brandon and R.M. Burian (eds), Genes, Organisms, Populations: Controversies over the Units of Selection, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R.: 1983, 'Universal Darwinism', in D.S. Bendall (ed.), Evolution from Molecules to Man, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 403-425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D.C.: 1995, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, Touchstone, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, G.M.: 1987, Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith, P.: 2000, 'The Replicator in Retrospect', Biology and Philosophy 15, 403-423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. and Gray, R.: 1994, 'Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation', Journal of Philosophy 91, 277-304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 1980, 'Individuality and Selection', Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11, 311-332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 1981, 'Units of Evolution: A Metaphysical Essay', in U.J. Jensen and R. Harré (eds), The Philosophy of Evolution, Harvester Press, Brighton, pp. 23-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 1988, 'Science as Process', Chicago University Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 2001, Science and Selection, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L., Langman, R.E. and Glenn, S.S.: 2001, 'A General Account of Selection: Biology, Immunology and Behavior', Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, 511-574. Reprinted in Hull, D.L.: 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, R.: 1974, The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, R.: 1991, Biology as Ideology, Harper, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millikan, R.G.: 1984, Language, Thought and Other Biologocal Categories, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millikan, R.G.: 1993, White Queen Psychology and other Tales for Alice, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millikan, R.G.: 2000, On Clear and Confused Ideas, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nanay, B.: 2001, 'A More Pluralist Typology of Selection Processes', Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, 547-548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neander, K.: 1995a, 'Pruning the Tree of Life', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, 59-80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neander, K.: 1995b, 'Explaining Complex Adaptations. A Reply to Sober's 'Reply to Neander' ',British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, 583-587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papineau, D.: 1987, Reality and Representation, Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papineau, D.: 1993, Philosophical Naturalism, Blackwell, Oxford/Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S.: 1997, How the Mind Works, W. W. Norton, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plotkin, H.C.: 1997, Evolution in Mind, A Lane, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.: 1972, Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, Clarendon, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E.: 1984, The Nature of Selection, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E.: 1995, 'Natural Selection and Distributive Explanation', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, 384-397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E. and Wilson, D.S.: 1994, 'A Critical Review of Philosophical Work on the Units of Selection Problem', Philosophy of Science 61, 534-555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterelny, K.: 2001, The Evolution of Agency and Other Essays, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterelny, K., Smith, K. and Dickison, M.: 1996, 'The Extended Replicator', Biology and Philosophy 11, 377-403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrba, E.: 1984, 'What Is Species Selection?', Systematic Zoology 33, 263-292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, D.M.: 2000, 'Chasing Shadows: Natural Selection and Adaptation', Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 31, 135-153.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nanay, B. The Return of the Replicator: What is Philosophically Significant in a General Account of Replication and Selection?. Biology & Philosophy 17, 109–121 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012932516775

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012932516775

Navigation