Selection without multiple replicators?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):550-551 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Hull et al.'s construction of operant learning as an instance of selection gives rise to problems that weaken this application of selection theory beyond acceptable limits. We point out that most fundamental is a disregard for the need to include multiple concurrent replicators in any definition of selection and indicate how this problem may be solved.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,069

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

Selection: Unexplored and underexplored realms.David A. Eckerman & Steven M. Kemp - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):536-537.
Is operant selectionism coherent?François Tonneau & Michel B. C. Sokolowski - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):558-559.
Selection in operant learning may fit a general model.Julian C. Leslie - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):542-543.
Do operant behaviors replicate?Todd Grantham - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):538-539.
On the origins of complexity.Bruce E. Hesse & Gary Novak - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):540-541.
Group selection and “the pious gene”.E. Sober & Wilson David - 1996 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (4):782-787.
More on group selection and human behavior.David Sloan Wilson & Elliott Sober - 1996 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (4):782-787.
Selection as a cause versus the causes of selection.A. Charles Catania - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):533-533.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
36 (#457,551)

6 months
4 (#863,607)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references