Biosemiotics 12 (1):39-55 (2019)

Abstract
Biological mimicry is regarded by many as a textbook illustration of Darwin’s idea of evolution by random mutation followed by differential selection of reproductively fit specimens, resulting in gradual phenotypic change in a population. In this paper, I argue that some cases of so-called mimicry are probably merely look-a-likes and do not gain an advantage due to their similarity in appearance to something else. In cases where a similar appearance does provide a benefit, I argue that it is possible that these forms of mimicry were created in a single generation. An interpretive response to an appearance as a sign can make a new structure perform drastically differently in an environment. In such cases, Darwin’s natural selection mechanism only helps to explain gradual the spread of these new forms, not the creation of them. I argue that biosemiosis should be regarded as a much more powerful mechanism for affecting evolutionary trajectories than the gradualist view allows. I focus on two cases of butterfly mimicry: the Viceroy and Monarch butterflies, supposed Müllerian mimics, and deadleaf mimic butterflies.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s12304-019-09349-9
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,908
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Material Basis of Evolution.Richard Goldschmidt - 1941 - Philosophy of Science 8 (3):394-395.
Organisers and Genes.C. H. Waddington - 1941 - Philosophy of Science 8 (3):463-463.
The Biosemiotic Concept of the Species.Kalevi Kull - 2016 - Biosemiotics 9 (1):61-71.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Meaning of Natural Selection and Reductionism in Evolutionary Biology.Adam Urbanek - 1983 - der 16. Weltkongress Für Philosophie 2:1346-1352.
Problems for Natural Selection as a Mechanism.Joyce C. Havstad - 2011 - Philosophy of Science 78 (3):512-523.
Fine-Tuning and the Infrared Bull’s-Eye.John T. Roberts - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 160 (2):287-303.
The Fine-Tuning Argument.Neil A. Manson - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (1):271-286.
Raphael Meldola and the Nineteenth-Century Neo-Darwinians.Anthony S. Travis - 2010 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 41 (1):143 - 172.
Is Sociobiology a New Paradigm?Michael Ruse - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (1):98-104.
Fine-Tuning Fine-Tuning.John Hawthorne & Yoaav Isaacs - 2018 - In Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne & Dani Rabinowitz (eds.), Knowledge, Belief, and God: New Insights in Religious Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 136-168.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-02-22

Total views
16 ( #662,059 of 2,497,752 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,370 of 2,497,752 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes