Are homologies really natural kinds?

Biology and Philosophy 34 (4):42 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The metaphysical nature of homologies has been variously characterized as natural kind, individualist, and pluralist-pragmatic. In this essay, I aim to build on the work of proponents of a natural kinds ontology for homologies using Richard Boyd’s influential HPC account of natural kinds. I aim to advance this position by showing the unique fit of extending the HPC account to homologies, deflecting individualist critiques, as well as the pluralist-pragmatic alternative, showing that homologies have a determinate metaphysical character as kinds. As an important extension of this position, I attempt to explain away how the mistaken metaphysics of the individualist, and derivatively the pluralist-pragmatic approach that contextually embraces it, can facilitate certain elements of biological practice.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,925

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-08-02

Downloads
33 (#659,104)

6 months
7 (#633,631)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christopher Pearson
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A Radical Solution to the Species Problem.Michael T. Ghiselin - 1974 - Systematic Zoology 23 (4):536–544.
Natural Kinds and Conceptual Change.Joseph LaPorte - 2003 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Natural laws in scientific practice.Marc Lange - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Homeostasis, species, and higher taxa.Richard Boyd - 1999 - In Robert Andrew Wilson (ed.), Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays. MIT Press. pp. 141-85.

View all 33 references / Add more references