Inscrutability and the Opacity of Natural Selection and Random Genetic Drift: Distinguishing the Epistemic and Metaphysical Aspects

被引:0
作者
Philippe Huneman
机构
[1] CNRS/Université Paris I Sorbonne,Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques
来源
Erkenntnis | 2015年 / 80卷
关键词
Natural Selection; Problematic Case; Reliable Factor; Random Genetic Drift; Counterfactual Dependence;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
‘Statisticalists’ argue that the individual interactions of organisms taken together constitute natural selection. On this view, natural selection is an aggregated effect of interactions rather than some added cause acting on populations. The statisticalists’ view entails that natural selection and drift are indistinguishable aggregated effects of interactions, so that it becomes impossible to make a difference between them. The present paper attempts to make sense of the difference between selection and drift, given the main insights of statisticalism; basically, it will disentangle the various kinds of indistinguishability between selection and drift that happen within biology, by examining the epistemological and metaphysical nature of the distinction between selection and drift. It will be based on a ‘difference-making account’ of selection. The first section will explicate the inscrutability of selection and drift, its various types in the statisticalist writings, and its implications. The second section specifies concepts of natural selection and drift in the difference making account of selection I am using, and shows that one can derive from this the statistical signatures of selection and drift. On this basis I focus on one sort of indistinguishability issue about selection and drift, which I call epistemic opacity, and explain why it mostly affects small populations. The last section explains why epistemic opacity does not raise an genuine epistemic problem for evolutionary biology.
引用
收藏
页码:491 / 518
页数:27
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Abrams M(2013)Populations and pigeons: Prosaic pluralism about evolutionary causes Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 294-301
  • [2] Ariew A(2004)The confusions of fitness British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 347-363
  • [3] Lewontin RC(1994)Chance and Natural Selection Philosophy of Science 51 183-211
  • [4] Beatty J(2004)Fitness, probability and the principles of natural selection British Journal for Philosophy of Science 55 693-712
  • [5] Bouchard F(2009)Productivity, relevance and natural selection Biology and Philosophy 24 325-340
  • [6] Rosenberg A(2012)Natural selection: A case for the counterfactual approach Erkenntnis 76 171-194
  • [7] Glennan S(2013)Assessing statistical views of natural selection: Room for non-local causation? Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 604-612
  • [8] Huneman P(1983)The measurement of selection on correlated characters Evolution 37 1210-1226
  • [9] Huneman P(1960)The evolutionary dynamics of a polymorphism in the house mouse Genetics 45 65-72
  • [10] Lande R(2009)Drift and ‘statistically abstractive explanations’ Philosophy of Science 76 464-487