Philosophy of Science 61 (4):556-578 (1994)
AbstractThe so-called "adaptationism" of mainstream evolutionary biology has been criticized from a variety of sources. One, which has received relatively little philosophical attention, is developmental biology. Developmental constraints are said to be neglected by adaptationists. This paper explores the divergent methodological and explanatory interests that separate mainstream evolutionary biology from its embryological and developmental critics. It will focus on the concept of constraint itself; even this central concept is understood differently by the two sides of the dispute
Similar books and articles
The Nature of Developmental Constraints and the Difference-Maker Argument for Externalism.Roger Sansom - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (4):441-459.
From Developmental Constraint to Evolvability: How Concepts Figure in Explanation and Disciplinary Identity.Ingo Brigandt - 2015 - In Alan C. Love (ed.), Conceptual Change in Biology: Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives on Evolution and Development. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 305-325.
How Developmental is Evolutionary Developmental Biology?Jason Scott Robert - 2002 - Biology and Philosophy 17 (5):591-611.
Evolutionary Morphology, Innovation, and the Synthesis of Evolutionary and Developmental Biology.Alan C. Love - 2003 - Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):309-345.
Homology in Comparative, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology: The Radiation of a Concept.Ingo Brigandt - 2003 - Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular and Developmental Evolution) 299:9-17.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Adaptationism and the Logic of Research Questions: How to Think Clearly About Evolutionary Causes.Elisabeth A. Lloyd - 2015 - Biological Theory 10 (4):DOI: 10.1007/s13752-015-0214-2.
What Evolvability Really Is.Rachael L. Brown - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (3):axt014.
Typology Now: Homology and Developmental Constraints Explain Evolvability.Ingo Brigandt - 2007 - Biology and Philosophy 22 (5):709-725.
The Proximate–Ultimate Distinction and Evolutionary Developmental Biology: Causal Irrelevance Versus Explanatory Abstraction.Massimo Pigliucci & Raphael Scholl - 2015 - Biology and Philosophy 30 (5):653-670.
References found in this work
Behaviorism and Logical Positivism: A Reassessment of the Alliance. [REVIEW]Laurence Smith - 1986 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 7 (4).
Neo-Rationalism Versus Neo-Darwinism: Integrating Development and Evolution. [REVIEW]Kelly C. Smith - 1992 - Biology and Philosophy 7 (4):431-451.
Doctor Dennett and Doctor Pangloss: Perfection and Selection in Biology and Psychology.Ron Amundson - 1990 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (3):577-581.
Clark Hull, Robert Cummins, and Functional Analysis.Ron Amundson & Laurence D. Smith - 1984 - Philosophy of Science 51 (December):657-666.