Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:15:36.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Engineering Design and Adaptation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Robert C. Richardson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reverse engineering is a matter of inferring adaptive function from structure. The utility of reverse engineering for evolutionary biology has been a matter of controversy. I offer a simple taxonomy of the uses of engineering design in assessing adaptation, with a variety of illustrations. The plausibility of applications of engineering design reflects the specific way the models are elaborated and derived.

Type
Evolutionary Theory
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1277 - 1288
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

I am grateful for discussions with Richard Burian, Peggy DesAutels, Thomas Polger, and Rob Skipper. The first version of this talk was given at ISHPSSB in 2001, and I received much valuable feedback in that setting. This work was supported with a grant from the Taft Faculty Committee at the University of Cincinnati.

References

Alberch, Pere (1982), “Developmental Constraints in Evolutionary Processes”, in Bonner, J. T. (ed.), Evolution and Development, Dahlem Conference Report No. 20. New York: Springer-Verlag, 313–332.Google Scholar
Amundson, Ron (1994), “Two Concepts of Constraint: Adaptationism and the Challenge from Developmental Biology”, Two Concepts of Constraint: Adaptationism and the Challenge from Developmental Biology 61:556–578.Google Scholar
Amundson, Ron (1996), “Historical Development of the Concept of Adaptation”, in Rose, M. R. and Lauder, G. V. (eds.), Adaptation. San Diego: Academic Press, 11–53.Google Scholar
Amundson, Ron, and Lauder, George V. (1998), “Function Without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology”, Function Without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology 9:443–470.Google Scholar
Beatty, John (1980), “Optimal Design Models and the Strategy of Model Building in Evolutionary Biology”, Optimal Design Models and the Strategy of Model Building in Evolutionary Biology 47:532–561.Google Scholar
Brandon, Robert N. (1990), Adaptation and Environment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C. (1995), Darwin's Dangerous Idea. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Fisher, Ronald A. 1990. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ghiselin, Michael (1983), “Lloyd Morgan's Canon on Evolutionary Context” [on D. C. Dennett], Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6:362–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Stephen J. (1977), Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen J., and Lewontin, Richard C. (1979), “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme”, The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme B205:581–598.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul (1996), “The Historical Turn in the Study of Adaptation”, The Historical Turn in the Study of Adaptation 47:511–532.Google Scholar
Lauder, George (1996), “The Argument from Design”, in Rose, M. R. and Lauder, G. V. (eds.), Adaptation. San Diego: Academic Press, 55–92.Google Scholar
Lewontin, Richard C. (1969), “The Bases of Conflict in Biological Explanation”, The Bases of Conflict in Biological Explanation 2:35–45.Google Scholar
MacArthur, Robert H. (1957), “On the Relative Abundance of Bird Species”, On the Relative Abundance of Bird Species 43:293–295.Google ScholarPubMed
MacArthur, Robert H. (1960), “On the Relative Abundance of Species”, On the Relative Abundance of Species 94:25–36.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John, Burian, Richard, Kauffman, Stuart, Alberch, Pere, Campbell, Joseph, Goodwin, Brian, Lande, Russell, Raup, David, and Wolpert, Louis (1985), “Developmental Constraints and Evolution”, Developmental Constraints and Evolution 60:265–287.Google Scholar
Mayr, Ernst (1983), “How to Carry Out the Adaptationist Program”, How to Carry Out the Adaptationist Program 143:361–380.Google Scholar
Ostram, J. H. (1994). “Archaeopteryx and the Origin of Flight”, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 49:27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prum, R. O., Brush, A. H. (2002), “The Evolutionary Origin and Diversification of Feathers”, The Evolutionary Origin and Diversification of Feathers 77:261–295.Google ScholarPubMed
Schank, Jeffrey C. and Wimsatt, William C. (1987), “Generative Entrenchment and Evolution”, in Fine, A. and Machamer, P. (eds.), PSA 1986. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science, 33–60.Google Scholar
Vogel, Steven (1988), Life's Devices: The Physical World of Animals and Plants. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vogel, Steven (1998), Cat's Paws and Catapults: Mechanical Worlds of Nature and People. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Williams, George C. (1992), Natural Selection: Domains, Levels and Challenges. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William C., and Schank, Jeffrey C. (1988), “Two Constraints on the Evolution of Complex Adaptations and the Means for Their Avoidance”, in Nitecki, Matthew H. (ed.), Evolutionary Progress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 231–273.Google Scholar