Epistemology, necessity, and evolution: a critical review of Michael Ruse’s Philosophy After Darwin [Book Review]

Biology and Philosophy 26 (3):449-457 (2011)

Michael Ruse’s new anthology Philosophy After Darwin provides great history and background in the major impacts Darwinism has had on philosophy, especially in ethics and epistemology. This review focuses on epistemology understood through the lens of evolution by natural selection. I focus on one of Ruse’s own articles in the collection, which responds to two classic articles by Konrad Lorenz and David Hull on the two major forms of evolutionary epistemology. I side with Ruse against Lorenz’s account of the necessity we think our principles of reasoning have, though I disagree with Ruse’s particular example. I also argue that Ruse’s alternative explanation is lacking. Against Hull, I side with Ruse in his doubts that a sociobiological approach to science will prove fruitful, though I point out that it has certain advantages other approaches do not have. Although I side with Ruse on the issue, I conclude that the two views do not really come into direct conflict and so one needs not reject either. Finally, I discuss Ruse’s positive view and raise questions for his conception of evolutionary epistemology. I conclude that his arguments are insufficient to overcome opposing views and his view has at least as many unintuitive conclusions as the alternatives
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10539-010-9226-2
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 48,987
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

Assessing Evolutionary Epistemology.Michael Bradie - 1986 - Biology and Philosophy 1 (4):401-459.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Michael Ruse's Design for Living.Robert J. Richards - 2004 - Journal of the History of Biology 37 (1):25 - 38.
Ruse's Darwinian Meta-Ethics: A Critique. [REVIEW]Peter Woolcock - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):423-439.
A Defense of Darwinian Accounts of Morality.John Lemos - 2001 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 31 (3):361-385.
Ruse's Treatment of the Evidence for Evolution: A Reconsideration.Alexander Rosenberg - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:83 - 93.


Added to PP index

Total views
35 ( #268,591 of 2,310,430 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #754,118 of 2,310,430 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature