Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T08:05:44.432Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Is Indeterminism the Source of the Statistical Character of Evolutionary Theory?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Leslie Graves*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Barbara L. Horan*
Affiliation:
Philosophy Program, Georgia Southern University
Alex Rosenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Georgia

Abstract

We argue that Brandon and Carson's (1996) “The Indeterministic Character of Evolutionary Theory” fails to identify any indeterminism that would require evolutionary theory to be a statistical or probabilistic theory. Specifically, we argue that (1) their demonstration of a mechanism by which quantum indeterminism might “percolate up” to the biological level is irrelevant; (2) their argument that natural selection is indeterministic because it is inextricably connected with drift fails to join the issue with determinism; and (3) their view that experimental methodology in botany assumes indeterminism is both false and incompatible with the commitment to discoverable causal mechanisms underlying biological processes. We remain convinced that the probabilism of the theory of evolution is epistemically, not ontologically, motivated.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by 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

Send requests for reprints to Alex Rosenberg, Honors Program, Academic Building, University of Georgia, Athens GA 30602.

References

Beatty, John (1984), “Chance and Natural Selection”, Philosophy of Science 51: 183211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, John (1992), “Fitness: Theoretical Contexts”, in Keller, Evelyn Fox and Lloyd, Elisabeth (eds.), Keywords in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 115120.Google Scholar
Beatty, John and Finsen, Susan (1989), “Rethinking the Propensity Interpretation: A Peek inside Pandora's Box”, in Ruse, Michael (ed.), What the Philosophy of Biology Is: Essays for David Hull. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, John (1964), “On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox”, Physics 1: 195200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandon, Robert (1978), “Adaptation and Evolutionary Theory”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 9: 181206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandon, Robert (1990), Adaptation and Environment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Brandon, Robert and Beatty, John (1984), “The Propensity Interpretation of Fitness: No Interpretation is No Substitute”, Philosophy of Science 51: 342347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandon, Robert and Carson, Scott (1996), “The Indeterministic Character of Evolutionary Theory: No 'No Hidden Variables Proof but No Room for Determinism Either”, Philosophy of Science 63: 315337.
Burian, Richard (1983), “Adaptation”, in Grene, Marjorie (ed.), Dimensions of Darwinism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 287314.Google Scholar
Crow, James and Kimura, Motoo (1970), An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Darwin, Charles (1859), On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, Theodosious (1975), Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dowe, Phil (1996), “Backwards Causation and the Direction of Causal Processes”, Mind 105: 227248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmel, Thomas (1973), An Introduction to Ecology and Population Biology. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Gillespie, John (1973), “Natural Selection with Varying Selection Coefficients—a Haploid Model”, Genetics Research 21: 115120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillespie, John (1974), “Natural Selection for Within-Generation Variance in Offspring”, Genetics 76: 601606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillespie, John (1977), “Natural Selection for Variances in Offspring Numbers—a New Evolutionary Principle”, American Naturalist 111: 10101014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay (1997), “Darwinian Fundamentalism”, The New York Review of Books 154 (10): 3439.Google Scholar
Horan, Barbara L. (1994), “The Statistical Character of Evolutionary Theory”, Philosophy of Science 61: 7695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horan, Barbara L. (forthcoming a), “Review of Robert Brandon (1996), Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology”, Philosophical Review.Google Scholar
Horan, Barbara L. (forthcoming b), Optimality Reasoning in Evolutionary Biology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Hull, David (1974), The Philosophy of Biological Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Mills, Susan and Beatty, John (1979), “The Propensity Interpretation of Fitness”, Philosophy of Science 46: 263286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millstein, Roberta (1996). “Random Drift and the Omniscient Viewpoint”, Philosophy of Science (Proceedings): S10S18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Ernst (1983), The Structure of Science. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Price, Huw (1996), Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Provine, William. B. (1986), Sewall Wright and Evolutionary Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Richardson, Robert and Burian, Richard (1992), “A Defense of the Propensity Interpretation of Fitness”, in Hull, David, Forbes, Marty, and Okruhlik, Kathleen (eds.), PSA 1992 vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, 349362.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex (1985), The Structure of Biological Science, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex (1988), “Is the Theory of Natural Selection a Statistical Theory?” Canadian Journal of Philosophy (Suppl.) 14: 187207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex (1994), Instrumental Biology or the Disunity of Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (1984), The Nature of Selection. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (1996), “Some Comments on Rosenberg's Review”, Philosophy of Science 63: 465470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, Elliott (forthcoming), “The Two Faces of Fitness”, in Singh, Rama, Paul, Diane, Krimbas, Constantin, and Beatty, John (eds.), Thinking about Evolution: Historical, Philosophical and Political Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John (1932), Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmachanik. Berlin: Springer. Reprinted and translated as Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Roger Beyer (trans.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1938), Letter to Alfred Sturtevant and Theodosious Dobzhansky, October 6, 1938. Quoted in Provine 1986, 353.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1967), Letter to Motoo Kimura, November 30, 1967. Quoted in Provine 1986, 471473.Google Scholar