Discussion: Reply to Hitchcock

Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):531-538 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Christopher Hitchcock‘s discussion of my use of screening-off in analyzing the causal process of natural selection raises some interesting issues to which I am pleased to reply. The bulk of his article is devoted to some fairly general points in the theory of explanation. In particular, he questions whether or not my point that phenotype screens off genotype from reproductive success (in cases of organismic selection) supports my claim that the explanation of differential reproductive success should be in terms of phenotypic differences, not genotypic differences. I will respond to this and show why the two supposed counter-examples to my position fail.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Screening-off and the units of selection.Elliott Sober - 1992 - Philosophy of Science 59 (1):142-152.
Discussion: Reply to Hitchcock.Robert N. Brandon - 1997 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):531-538.
Discussion: Screening-off and natural selection.Wim J. van der Steen - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (1):115-121.
The Phenotype as the Level of Selection: Cave Organisms as Model Systems.Thomas C. Kane, Robert C. Richardson & Daniel W. Fong - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:151-164.
Screening-off and natural selection.J. Van Der Steen Wim - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (1):115-121.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-31

Downloads
4 (#1,556,099)

6 months
3 (#902,269)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Brandon
Duke University

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references