On fitness

Biology and Philosophy 19 (2):185-203 (2004)
Abstract
The concept of fitness, central to population genetics and to the synthetic theory of evolution, is discussed. After a historical introduction on the origin of this concept, the current meaning of it in population genetics is examined: a cause of the selective process and its quantification. Several difficulties arise for its exact definition. Three adequacy criteria for such a definition are formulated. It is shown that it is impossible to formulate an adequate definition of fitness respecting these criteria. The propensity definition of fitness is presented and rejected. Finally it is argued that fitness is a conceptual device, a useful tool, only for descriptive purposes of selective processes, changing from case to case, and thus devoid of any substantial physical counterpart. Any attempt to its reification is an apport to the metaphysical load evolutionary theory has inherited from Natural Theology.
Keywords Fitness  Population genetics  Theory of evolution
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/B:BIPH.0000024402.80835.a7
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,126
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
A New Foundation for the Propensity Interpretation of Fitness.Charles H. Pence & Grant Ramsey - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):851-881.
How Do Natural Selection and Random Drift Interact?Marshall Abrams - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5):666-679.
Driftability.Grant Ramsey - 2013 - Synthese 190 (17):3909-3928.
The Unity of Fitness.Marshall Abrams - 2009 - Philosophy of Science 76 (5):750-761.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A Defense of Propensity Interpretations of Fitness.Robert C. Richardson & Richard M. Burian - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:349 - 362.
Fitness as a Function.Henry Byerly - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:494 - 501.
The Confusions of Fitness.André Ariew & R. C. Lewontin - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):347-363.
What Fitness Can't Be.Andre Ariew - 2009 - Erkenntnis 71 (3):289 - 301.
The Propensity Interpretation of Fitness.Susan K. Mills & John H. Beatty - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (2):263-286.
Additivity and the Units of Selection.Peter Godfrey-Smith - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:315 - 328.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

47 ( #111,370 of 2,171,820 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #326,616 of 2,171,820 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums