Pluralism, antirealism, and the units of selection

Acta Biotheoretica 45 (2):117-126 (1997)
Abstract
In an important article, Kim Sterelny and Philip Kitcher challenge the common assumption that for any biological phenomenon requiring a selectionist explanation, it is possible to identify a uniquely correct account of the relevant selection process. They argue that selection events can be modeled in any of a number of different, equally correct ways. They call their view ' Pluralism,' and explicitly connect it with various antirealist positions in the philosophy of science. I critically evaluate Sterelny and Kitcher's Pluralism along with its attendant antirealist theses. In particular, I argue that there are serious problems with their pluralistic antirealism regarding units of selection. By correctly diagnosing these problems a more adequate position can be constructed. I defend such a position, which I designate Inclusive Hierarchical Monism, and show how it captures the important virtues of Sterelny and Kitcher's approach while avoiding its problems
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy of Biology   Evolutionary Biology
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1000377821347
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,349
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Shifting Values Partly Explain the Debate Over Group Selection.Ayelet Shavit - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 35 (4):697-720.
Shifting Values Partly Explain the Debate Over Group Selection.Ayelet Shavit - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 35 (4):697-720.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Competing Units of Selection?: A Case of Symbiosis.Sandra D. Mitchell - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (3):351-367.
The Levels of Selection.Robert Brandon - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:315 - 323.
Pluralism, Entwinement, and the Levels of Selection.Robert A. Wilson - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (3):531-552.
The Units of Selection and the Bases of Selection.David Walton - 1991 - Philosophy of Science 58 (3):417-435.
Why the Gene Will Not Return.Elisabeth A. Lloyd - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (2):287-310.
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
19 ( #265,556 of 2,193,595 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #145,717 of 2,193,595 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature