Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):520-521 (2002)
Andrews et al. effectively argue that, despite prominent criticism, adaptationism can be a viable research strategy. We agree. In our complementary commentary, we discuss the neglected method of inference to the best explanation and argue that it is a valuable addition to the adaptationist's methodological practice.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
The Evolutionary Psychology of Human Mating: A Response to Buller's Critique.John Klasios - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 47:1-11.
Similar books and articles
The Functions of Fossils: Inference and Explanation in Functional Morphology.D. Turner - 2000 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 31 (1):193-212.
Adaptationism: Hypothesis or Heuristic? [REVIEW]David Resnik - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (1):39-50.
Fodor on Cognition, Modularity, and Adaptationism.S. Okasha - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (1):68-88.
Biological Levers and Extended Adaptationism.Gillian Barker - 2007 - Biology and Philosophy 23 (1):1-25.
The Historical Turn in the Study of Adaptation.Paul E. Griffiths - 1996 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (4):511-532.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #125,607 of 2,164,295 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,039 of 2,164,295 )
How can I increase my downloads?