Results for 'Levels of selection'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  78
    The Levels of Selection.Robert N. Brandon - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:315 - 323.
    In this paper Wimsatt's analysis of units of selection is taken as defining the units of selection question. A definition of levels of selection is offered and it is shown that the levels of selection question is quite different from the units of selection question. Some of the relations between units and levels are briefly explored. It is argued that the levels of selection question is the question relevant to explanatory (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   66 citations  
  2.  20
    Levels of selection: An alternative to individualism in biology and the human sciences.David Sloan Wilson - 1994 - In Elliott Sober (ed.), Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology. The Mit Press. Bradford Books.
  3. Evolution and the levels of selection.Samir Okasha - 2006 - New York: Oxford University Press.
    Does natural selection act primarily on individual organisms, on groups, on genes, or on whole species? The question of levels of selection - on which biologists and philosophers have long disagreed - is central to evolutionary theory and to the philosophy of biology. Samir Okasha's comprehensive analysis gives a clear account of the philosophical issues at stake in the current debate.
  4.  44
    Facts, Conventions, and the Levels of Selection.Pierrick Bourrat - 2021 - Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Debates concerning the units and levels of selection have persisted for over fifty years. One major question in this literature is whether units and levels of selection are genuine, in the sense that they are objective features of the world, or merely reflect the interests and goals of an observer. Scientists and philosophers have proposed a range of answers to this question. This Element introduces this literature and proposes a novel contribution. It defends a realist stance (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  5. Levels of Selection Are Artefacts of Different Fitness Temporal Measures.Pierrick Bourrat - 2015 - Ratio 28 (1):40-50.
    In this paper I argue against the claim, recently put forward by some philosophers of biology and evolutionary biologists, that there can be two or more ontologically distinct levels of selection. I show by comparing the fitness of individuals with that of collectives of individuals in the same environment and over the same period of time – as required to decide if one or more levels of selection is acting in a population – that the (...) of collectives is a by-product of selection at the individual level; thus, talking about two or more levels of selection represents merely a different perspective on one and the same process. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  6.  62
    Levels of selection in biofilms: multispecies biofilms are not evolutionary individuals.Ellen Clarke - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (2):191-212.
    Microbes are generally thought of as unicellular organisms, but we know that many microbes live as parts of biofilms—complex, surface-attached microbial communities numbering millions of cells. Some authors have recently argued in favour of reconceiving biofilms as biological entities in their own right. In particular, some have claimed that multispecies biofilms are evolutionary individuals : 10126–10132 2015). Against this view, I defend the conservative consensus that selection acts primarily upon microbial cells.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  7.  69
    The levels of selection debate: Philosophical issues.Samir Okasha - 2006 - Philosophy Compass 1 (1):74–85.
    For a number of years, the debate in evolutionary biology over the ’levels of selection’ has attracted intense interest from philosophers of science. The main question concerns the level of the biological hierarchy at which natural selection occurs. Does selection act on organisms, genes, groups, colonies, demes, species, or some combination of these? According to traditional Darwinian theory the answer is the organism -- it is the differential survival and reproduction of individual organisms that drives the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  8.  41
    Levels of selection and the formal Darwinism project.Deborah E. Shelton & Richard E. Michod - 2014 - Biology and Philosophy 29 (2):217-224.
    Understanding good design requires addressing the question of what units undergo natural selection, thereby becoming adapted. There is, therefore, a natural connection between the formal Darwinism project (which aims to connect population genetics with the evolution of design and fitness maximization) and levels of selection issues. We argue that the formal Darwinism project offers contradictory and confusing lines of thinking concerning level(s) of selection. The project favors multicellular organisms over both the lower (cell) and higher (social (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9.  85
    A levels-of-selection approach to evolutionary individuality.Ellen Clarke - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (6):893-911.
    What changes when an evolutionary transition in individuality takes place? Many different answers have been given, in respect of different cases of actual transition, but some have suggested a general answer: that a major transition is a change in the extent to which selection acts at one hierarchical level rather than another. The current paper evaluates some different ways to develop this general answer as a way to characterise the property ‘evolutionary individuality’; and offers a justification of the option (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  10. Levels of Selection.Robert A. Wilson - 2007 - In Mohan Matthen & Christopher Stephens (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, Volume 3, Philosophy of Biology. pp. 155-176.
    This article provides an overview of work on the levels of selection in the philosophy of biology.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  11.  28
    Levels of selection and capacity limits.Veronica J. Dark, William A. Johnston, Marina Myles-Worsley & Martha J. Farah - 1985 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 114 (4):472-497.
  12.  11
    Levels of selection and human ethology.Gerald Borgia - 1979 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2 (1):30-30.
  13. Pluralism, entwinement, and the levels of selection.Robert A. Wilson - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (3):531-552.
    This paper distinguishes and critiques several forms of pluralism about the levels of selection, and introduces a novel way of thinking about the biological properties and processes typically conceptualized in terms of distinct levels. In particular, "levels" should be thought of as being entwined or fused. Since the pluralism discussed is held by divergent theorists, the argument has implications for many positions in the debate over the units of selection. And since the key points on (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  14. What are the ‘levels’ in levels of selection?Markus Ilkka Eronen & Grant Ramsey - forthcoming - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
    The levels of selection debate is generally taken to be a debate about how natural selection can occur at the various levels of biological organization. In this paper, we argue that questions about levels of selection should be analyzed separately from questions about levels of organization. In the deflationary proposal we defend, all that is necessary for multilevel selection is that there are cases in which particles are nested in collectives, and that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  88
    Maynard Smith on the levels of selection question.Samir Okasha - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (5):989-1010.
    The levels of selection problem was central to Maynard Smith’s work throughout his career. This paper traces Maynard Smith’s views on the levels of selection, from his objections to group selection in the 1960s to his concern with the major evolutionary transitions in the 1990s. The relations between Maynard Smith’s position and those of Hamilton and G.C. Williams are explored, as is Maynard Smith’s dislike of the Price equation approach to multi-level selection. Maynard Smith’s (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  16. Levels of Selection in Synergy.Alejandro Rosas - 2009 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 28 (2):135-150.
    Individual and group selection are usually conceived as opposed evolutionary processes. Though cases of synergy are occasionally recognized, the evolutionary importance of synergy is largely ignored. However, synergy is the plausible explanation for the evolution of collectives as higher level individuals i.e., collectives acting as adaptive units, e.g., genomes and colonies of social insects. It rests on the suppression of the predictable tendency of evolutionary units to benefit at the expense of other units or of the wholes they contribute (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Evolution and the Levels of Selection.Samir Okasha - 2009 - Critica 41 (123):162-170.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   285 citations  
  18. Individuality and adaptation across levels of selection: How shall we name and generalize the unit of Darwinism?Stephen Jay Gould & Elisabeth A. Lloyd - 1999 - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96 (21):11904-09.
    Two major clarifications have greatly abetted the understanding and fruitful expansion of the theory of natural selection in recent years: the acknowledgment that interactors, not replicators, constitute the causal unit of selection; and the recognition that interactors are Darwinian individuals, and that such individuals exist with potency at several levels of organization (genes, organisms, demes, and species in particular), thus engendering a rich hierarchical theory of selection in contrast with Darwin’s own emphasis on the organismic level. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  19. Units and levels of selection.Elisabeth Lloyd - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    The theory of evolution by natural selection is, perhaps, the crowning intellectual achievement of the biological sciences. There is, however, considerable debate about which entity or entities are selected and what it is that fits them for that role. This article aims to clarify what is at issue in these debates by identifying four distinct, though often confused, concerns and then identifying how the debates on what constitute the units of selection depend to a significant degree on which (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  20.  53
    Screening-off and The Levels of Selection.Ron McClamrock - 1995 - Erkenntnis 42 (1):107-112.
    In The Levels of Selection (Brandon, 1984), Robert Brandon provides a suggestive but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to use the probabilistic notion ofscreening off in providing a schema for dealing with an aspect of the units of selection question in the philosophy of biology. I characterize that failure, and suggest a revision and expansion of Brandon's account which addresses its key shortcoming.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  21.  49
    Cancer and the Levels of Selection.Samir Okasha - forthcoming - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
  22. Evolutionary Developmental Biology Meets Levels of Selection: Modular Integration or Competition, or Both?Rasmus Grønfeldt Winther - 2005 - In Werner Callebaut & Diego Rasskin-Gutman (eds.), Modularity. Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems. MIT Press.
  23.  36
    Moving past the levels of selection debates: Samir Okasha, Evolution and the levels of selection, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.Stephen M. Downes - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (5):703-709.
  24.  11
    The Phenotype as the Level of Selection: Cave Organisms as Model Systems.Thomas C. Kane, Robert C. Richardson & Daniel W. Fong - 1990 - PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990 (1):151-164.
    Selection operates at many levels. Some of the most obvious cases are organismic, such as changes in coloration under the influence of predation (cf. Kettlewell 1973; also Endler 1986). It also operates at other levels. Meiotic drive involves selection for a gene, independently of its effect on the organism. At a higher level, there may also be selection for patterns of colony growth in social insects, again under the influence of predation (cf. Wilson 1971). The (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  50
    Strategic differentiation and integration of genomic-level heritabilities facilitate individual differences in preparedness and plasticity of human life history.Michael A. Woodley of Menie, Aurelio José Figueredo, Tomás Cabeza de Baca, Heitor B. F. Fernandes, Guy Madison, Pedro S. A. Wolf & Candace J. Black - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6:134325.
    The Continuous Parameter Estimation Model is applied to develop individual genomic-level heritabilities for the latent hierarchical structure and developmental dynamics of Life History (LH) strategy LH strategies relate to the allocations of bioenergetic resources into different domains of fitness. LH has moderate to high population-level heritability in humans, both at the level of the high-order Super-K Factor and the lower-order factors, the K-Factor, Covitality Factor, and General Factor of Personality (GFP). Several important questions remain unexplored. We developed measures of genome-level (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  15
    The Phenotype as the Level of Selection: Cave Organisms as Model Systems.Thomas C. Kane, Robert C. Richardson & Daniel W. Fong - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:151-164.
    Selection operates at many levels. Robert Brandon has distinguished the question of the level of selection from the unit of selection, arguing that the phenotype is commonly the target of selection, whatever the unit of selection might be. He uses "screening off" as a criterion for distinguishing the level of selection. Cave animals show a common morphological pattern which includes hypertrophy of some structures and reduction or loss of others. In a study of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  8
    The Units and Levels of Selection.Samir Okasha - 2008 - In Sahorta Sarkar & Anya Plutynski (eds.), Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Blackwell. pp. 138–156.
    This chapter contains section titled: Introduction Historical Remarks The Gene's Eye View of Evolution Group Selection and Kin Selection Species Selection and Macroevolution Multilevel Selection Theory and the Major Transitions in Evolution Conclusion References Further Reading.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Varieties of population structure and the levels of selection.Peter Godfrey-Smith - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (1):25-50.
    Group-structured populations, of the kind prominent in discussions of multilevel selection, are contrasted with ‘neighbor-structured’ populations. I argue that it is a necessary condition on multilevel description of a selection process that there should be a nonarbitrary division of the population into equivalence classes (or an approximation to this situation). The discussion is focused via comparisons between two famous problem cases involving group structure (altruism and heterozygote advantage) and two neighbor-structured cases that resemble them. Conclusions are also drawn (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   35 citations  
  29. Units and levels of selection.Elisabeth A. Lloyd - 2007 - In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press.
  30.  84
    The “averaging fallacy” and the levels of selection.Samir Okasha - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 19 (2):167-184.
    This paper compares two well-known arguments in the units of selection literature, one due to , the other due to . Both arguments concern the legitimacy of averaging fitness values across contexts and making inferences about the level of selection on that basis. The first three sections of the paper shows that the two arguments are incompatible if taken at face value, their apparent similarity notwithstanding. If we accept Sober and Lewontin's criterion for when averaging genic fitnesses across (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  31. Editorial 123 guilt, aspiration and the free self.In Guilt & Summaries of Selected Works - 1969 - Humanitas 5 (2):121.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. Realism, Conventionalism, and Causal Decomposition in Units of Selection: Reflections on Samir Okasha’s Evolution and the Levels of Selection.Elliott Sober - 2010 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82 (1):221-231.
    I discuss two subjects in Samir Okasha’s excellent book, Evolution and the Levels of Selection. In consonance with Okasha’s critique of the conventionalist view of the units of selection problem, I argue that conventionalists have not attended to what realists mean by group, individual, and genic selection. In connection with Okasha’s discussion of the Price equation and contextual analysis, I discuss whether the existence of these two quantitative frameworks is a challenge to realism.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  33.  36
    Dynamics, Symmetry, and the Levels of Selection.Benjamin Jantzen - unknown
    Most attempts to answer the question of whether populations of groups can undergo natural selection focus on properties of the groups themselves rather than the dynamics of the population. Those approaches to group selection that do emphasize dynamics lack an account of the relevant notion of equivalent dynamics. I present a new approach to identifying instances of evolution by natural selection that is based upon dynamical symmetries. I apply the symmetry method to arrive at an affirmative but (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34.  42
    Evolution and the Levels of Selection.Patrick Forber - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (4):626-630.
  35.  71
    The Paradox of Sexual Reproduction and the Levels of Selection: Can Sociobiology Shed a Light?Joachim Dagg - 2012 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 4 (20130604).
    The group selection controversy largely focuses on altruism (e.g., Wilson 1983; Lloyd 2001; Shavit 2004; Okasha 2006, 173ff; Borrello 2010; Leigh 2010; Rosas 2010; Hamilton and Dimond in press). Multilevel selection theory is a resolution of this controversy. Whereas kin selection partitions inclusive fitness into direct and indirect components (via influencing the replication of copies of genes in other individuals), multilevel selection considers within-group and between-group components of fitness (Gardner et al. 2011; Lion et al. 2011). (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  36.  19
    Language and levels of selection.Lee Alan Dugatkin & David Sloan Wilson - 1993 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (4):701-701.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  8
    An Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States: Biological Sciences.Lyle V. Jones, Gardner Lindzey, Porter E. Coggeshall & Conference Board of the Associated Research Councils - 1982 - National Academies Press.
    The quality of doctoral-level biochemistry (N=139), botany (N=83), cellular/molecular biology (N=89), microbiology (N=134), physiology (N=101), and zoology (N=70) programs at United States universities was assessed, using 16 measures. These measures focused on variables related to: (1) program size; (2) characteristics of graduates; (3) reputational factors (scholarly quality of faculty, effectiveness of programs in educating research scholars/scientists, improvement in program quality during the last 5 years); (4) university library size; (5) research support; and (6) publication records. Chapter I discusses prior attempts (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  8
    An Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States: Mathematical and Physical Sciences.Lyle V. Jones, Gardner Lindzey, Porter E. Coggeshall & Conference Board of the Associated Research Councils - 1982 - National Academies Press.
    The quality of doctoral-level chemistry (N=145), computer science (N=58), geoscience (N=91), mathematics (N=115), physics (N=123), and statistics/biostatistics (N=64) programs at United States universities was assessed, using 16 measures. These measures focused on variables related to: program size; characteristics of graduates; reputational factors (scholarly quality of faculty, effectiveness of programs in educating research scholars/scientists, improvement in program quality during the last 5 years); university library size; research support; and publication records. Chapter I discusses prior attempts to assess quality in graduate education, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Sober on Brandon on screening-off and the levels of selection.Janis Antonovics, R. M. Burian, S. Carson, G. Coper, P. S. Davies, C. Hovarth, B. D. Mishler, R. C. Richardson, S. Smith & P. H. Thrall - 1994 - Philosophy of Science 61:4754486.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  40. Okasha’s evolution and the levels of selection: toward a broader conception of theoretical biology: Oxford University Press, Oxford. [REVIEW]Massimo Pigliucci - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (3):405-415.
    The debate about the levels of selection has been one of the most controversial both in evolutionary biology and in philosophy of science. Okasha’s book makes the sort of contribution that simply will not be able to be ignored by anyone interested in this field for many years to come. However, my interest here is in highlighting some examples of how Okasha goes about discussing his material to suggest that his book is part of an increasingly interesting trend (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  41. Sober on Brandon on screening-off and the levels of selection.Robert N. Brandon, Janis Antonovics, Richard Burian, Scott Carson, Greg Cooper, Paul Sheldon Davies, Christopher Horvath, Brent D. Mishler, Robert C. Richardson, Kelly Smith & Peter Thrall - 1994 - Philosophy of Science 61 (3):475-486.
    Sober (1992) has recently evaluated Brandon's (1982, 1990; see also 1985, 1988) use of Salmon's (1971) concept of screening-off in the philosophy of biology. He critiques three particular issues, each of which will be considered in this discussion.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  42.  10
    Dogma, Heresy, and Conversion: Vero Copner Wynne-Edwards's Crusade and the Levels-of-Selection Debate.Mark Borrello - 2008 - In Oren Harman & Michael Dietrich (eds.), Rebels, Mavericks, and Heretics in Biology. Yale University Press. pp. 213.
  43. Moving past the levels of selection debates: review of Samir Okasha’s Evolution and the Levels of Selection: Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006. [REVIEW]Stephen M. Downes - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (3):417-423.
  44.  28
    Kinds of process and the levels of selection.Benjamin C. Jantzen - 2019 - Synthese 196 (6):2407-2433.
    Most attempts to answer the question of whether populations of groups can undergo natural selection focus on properties of the groups themselves rather than the dynamics of the population of groups. Those approaches to group selection that do emphasize dynamics lack an account of the relevant notion of equivalent dynamics. I show that the theory of ‘dynamical kinds’ I proposed in Jantzen :3617–3646, 2014) can be used as a framework for assessing dynamical equivalence. That theory is based upon (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  45.  34
    Inheritance by recruitment: A reply to Clarke’s “Levels of selection in biofilms”.Makmiller Pedroso - 2017 - Biology and Philosophy 32 (1):127-131.
    Doolittle :351–378, 2013) and Ereshefsky and Pedroso argue that selection can act at the level of biofilms and other microbial communities. Clarke is skeptical and argues that selection acts on microbial cells rather than microbial communities. Her main criticism is that biofilms lack one of the ingredients required for selection to operate: heritability. This paper replies to her concern by elaborating how biofilm-level traits can be inheritable.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  46.  28
    Levels of organization, selection, and information storage in biological and social evaluation.Donald T. Campbell - 1981 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4 (2):236-237.
  47. Levels of Ontology and Natural Language: the Case of the Ontology of Parts and Wholes.Friederike Moltmann - 2021 - In James Miller (ed.), The Language of Ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    It is common in contemporary metaphysics to distinguish two levels of ontology: the ontology of ordinary objects and the ontology of fundamental reality. This papers argues that natural language reflects not only the ontology of ordinary objects, but also a language-driven ontology, which is involved in the mass-count distinction and part-structure-sensitive semantic selection, as well as perhaps the light ontology of pleonastic entities. The paper recasts my older theory of situated part structures without situations, making use of a (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  48.  45
    Activity anorexia: Biological, behavioral, and neural levels of selection.W. David Pierce - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):551-552.
    Activity anorexia illustrates selection of behavior at the biological, behavioral, and neural levels. Based on evolutionary history, food depletion increases the reinforcement value of physical activity that, in turn, decreases the reinforcement effectiveness of eating – resulting in activity anorexia. Neural opiates participate in the selection of physical activity during periods of food depletion.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49.  17
    A general account of selection: Biology, immunology, and behavior-Open Peer Commentary-Activity anorexia: Biological, behavioral, and neural levels of selection.D. L. Hull, R. E. Langman, S. S. Glenn & W. D. Pierce - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):551-551.
    Activity anorexia illustrates selection of behavior at the biological, behavioral, and neural levels. Based on evolutionary history, food depletion increases the reinforcement value of physical activity that, in turn, decreases the reinforcement effectiveness of eating – resulting in activity anorexia. Neural opiates participate in the selection of physical activity during periods of food depletion.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50.  38
    Emergent group traits, reproduction, and levels of selection.Samir Okasha - 2014 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37 (3):268-269.
1 — 50 / 1000