Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):377-403 (1996)

Authors
Kim Sterelny
Australian National University
Kelly Smith
Clemson University
Abstract
This paper evaluates and criticises the developmental systems conception of evolution and develops instead an extension of the gene's eye conception of evolution. We argue (i) Dawkin's attempt to segregate developmental and evolutionary issues about genes is unsatisfactory. On plausible views of development it is arbitrary to single out genes as the units of selection. (ii) The genotype does not carry information about the phenotype in any way that distinguishes the role of the genes in development from that other factors. (iii) There is no simple and general causal criterion which distinguishes the role of genes in development and evolution. (iv) There is, however, an important sense in which genes but not every other developmental factor represent the phenotype. (v) The idea that genes represent features of the phenotype forces us to recognise that genes are not the only, or almost the only, replicators. Many mechanisms of replication are involved in both development and evolution. (vi) A conception of evolutionary history which recognises both genetic and non-genetic replicators, lineages of replicators and interactors has advantages over both the radical rejection of the replicator/interactor distinction and the conservative restriction of replication to genetic replication.
Keywords development  developmental systems  gene  genetic information  evolution  information  inheritance  interactor  Lamarck  Meme  replicator  selection  unit of selection  vehicle  Weismann
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00128788
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,261
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

In Defense of Proper Functions.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 1989 - Philosophy of Science 56 (June):288-302.
A Theory of Content and Other Essays.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 1990 - Philosophical Review 101 (4):898-901.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

What is an Organism? An Immunological Answer.Thomas Pradeu - 2010 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 32 (2-3):247-267.
Innateness and the Sciences.Matteo Mameli & Patrick Bateson - 2006 - Biology and Philosophy 21 (2):155-188.
Consumers Need Information: Supplementing Teleosemantics with an Input Condition.Nicholas Shea - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):404-435.

View all 103 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Fearless Vampire Conservator: Phillip Kitcher and Genetic Determinism.Paul E. Griffiths - 2006 - In Christoph Rehmann-Sutter & Eva M. Neumann-Held (eds.), Genes in Development: Rethinking the Molecular Paradigm. Duke University Press. pp. 175-198.
Replicator II – Judgement Day.Paul E. Griffiths & Russell D. Gray - 1997 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):471-492.
Replication Without Replicators.Bence Nanay - 2011 - Synthese 179 (3):455-477.
The New Mutation Theory of Phenotypic Evolution.Masatoshi Nei - 2007 - Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104 (30):12335-12242.
Development Aid: On Ontogeny and Ethics.T. Lewens - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 33 (2):195-217.
What is a Gene? From Molecules to Metaphysics.Holmes Rolston - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (6):471-497.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
126 ( #86,052 of 2,455,876 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #84,338 of 2,455,876 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes