Skip to main content
Log in

Risky Business

What Darwin Got Wrong Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2010 (288 pp; $26.00 hbk; ISBN 978-0-374-28879-2)

  • Essay Review
  • Published:
Biological Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

References

  • Bapteste E, Burian R (2010) On the need for integrative phylogenomics and some steps toward its creation. Biology and Philosophy 25: 711–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett HC (2010) The wrong kind of wrong. Evolution and Human Behavior (in press). doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.003

  • Block N, Kitcher P (2010) Misunderstanding Darwin. Boston Review 35(2).

  • Dupré J, O’Malley M (2009) Varieties of living things. Philosophy and Theory in Biology 1: 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor J (2007) Why pigs don’t have wings. London Review of Books 29(20): 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor J, Piattelli-Palmarini M (2010) Survival of the fittest theory: Darwinism’s limits. New Scentist 2746: 28–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert SF, Epel D (2008) Ecological Developmental Biology: Integrating Epigenetics, Medicine, and Evolution. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley J (2010) Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. The Definitive Edition (Pigliucci M, Müller GB, eds). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koonin EV (2009) Darwinian evolution in the light of genomics. Nucleic Acids Research 37: 1011–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin RC (2010) Not so natural selection. New York Review of Books, 57(9). http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/May/27/not-so-natural-selection/?page=1

  • Lynch M (2007) The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origin of organismal complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 104 (Suppl. 1): 8597–8604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (2004) Happy birthday: 80 years of watching the evolutionary scenery. Science 305: 46–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minelli A (2010) Evolutionary developmental biology does not offer a significant challenge to the neo-Darwinian paradigm. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology (Ayala F, Arp R, eds), 213–226. New York: Wiley Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman SA (2008) Evolution: The public’s problem, and the scientists.’ Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 19: 98–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohno S (1970) Evolution by Gene Duplication. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Piattelli-Palmarini M (2008) L’ornitorinco sconfigge Darwin. Corriere della Sera, Milan, May 11: 33.

  • Pigliucci M (2010) A misguided attack on evolution. Nature 464: 353–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1979) Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro JA (1997) A third way. Boston Review 22(1): 32–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E (1984) The Nature of Selection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner GP, Altenberg L (1996) Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution 50: 967–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davide Vecchi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vecchi, D. Risky Business. Biol Theory 5, 187–193 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_r_00039

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_r_00039

Navigation