The proximate–ultimate distinction and evolutionary developmental biology: causal irrelevance versus explanatory abstraction

Biology and Philosophy 30 (5):653-670 (2015)

Authors
Massimo Pigliucci
CUNY Graduate Center
Abstract
Mayr’s proximate–ultimate distinction has received renewed interest in recent years. Here we discuss its role in arguments about the relevance of developmental to evolutionary biology. We show that two recent critiques of the proximate–ultimate distinction fail to explain why developmental processes in particular should be of interest to evolutionary biologists. We trace these failures to a common problem: both critiques take the proximate–ultimate distinction to neglect specific causal interactions in nature. We argue that this is implausible, and that the distinction should instead be understood in the context of explanatory abstractions in complete causal models of evolutionary change. Once the debate is reframed in this way, the proximate–ultimate distinction’s role in arguments against the theoretical significance of evo-devo is seen to rely on a generally implicit premise: that the variation produced by development is abundant, small and undirected. We show that a “lean version” of the proximate–ultimate distinction can be maintained even when this isotropy assumption does not hold. Finally, we connect these considerations to biological practice. We show that the investigation of developmental constraints in evolutionary transitions has long relied on a methodology which foregrounds the explanatory role of developmental processes. It is, however, entirely compatible with the lean version of the proximate–ultimate distinction
Keywords Proximate–ultimate distinction  Ernst Mayr  Evolutionary developmental biology  Niche construction  Plasticity  Abstraction  Methodology  Pere Alberch
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2015
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10539-014-9427-1
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Thinking About Mechanisms.Peter K. Machamer, Lindley Darden & Carl F. Craver - 2000 - Philosophy of Science 67 (1):1-25.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Evolutionary Gene and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis.Qiaoying Lu & Pierrick Bourrat - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axw035.
Omnipotence and Spatiotemporally Restricted Entities.Kevin Vandergriff - 2018 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 84 (1):3-29.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Causes, Proximate and Ultimate.Richard C. Francis - 1990 - Biology and Philosophy 5 (4):401-415.
The Phylogeny Fallacy and the Ontogeny Fallacy.Adam Hochman - 2013 - Biology and Philosophy 28 (4):593-612.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-02-05

Total views
1,069 ( #2,627 of 2,285,767 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
191 ( #2,416 of 2,285,767 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature