Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Evolutionary Progress: Stephen Jay Gould’s Rejection and Its Critique.Jianhui Li - 2019 - Philosophy Study 9 (6).
    In evolutionary theory, we generally believe that the evolution of life is from simple to complex, from single to diverse, and from lower to higher. Thus, the idea of evolutionary progress appears obvious. However, in contemporary academic circles, some biologists and philosophers challenge this idea. Among them, Gould is the most influential. This paper first describes Gould’s seven arguments against evolutionary progress, i.e., the human arrogance argument, anthropocentric argument, no inner thrust argument, no biological base argument, extreme contingency argument, statistical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Nature's Two Ends: The Ambiguity of Progress in Evolution.Horace L. Fairlamb - 2010 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 35 (1):35-55.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Philosophy's neglect of the social sciences.Rollo Handy - 1958 - Philosophy of Science 25 (2):117-124.
    The problem of the “proper” relation of philosophy and science has been the source of many disputes in our intellectual history. Recently some philosophers and scientists have insisted that technical philosophy is neglecting the results of the social sciences to the detriment of philosophy. The purpose of this paper is to consider the attempts made by contemporary philosophers to utilize material from the behavioral sciences, to review certain of the arguments in favor of the utilization of such material, and to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The notion of progress in evolutionary biology – the unresolved problem and an empirical suggestion.Bernd Rosslenbroich - 2006 - Biology and Philosophy 21 (1):41-70.
    Modern biology is ambivalent about the notion of evolutionary progress. Although most evolutionists imply in their writings that they still understand large-scale macroevolution as a somewhat progressive process, the use of the term “progress” is increasingly criticized and avoided. The paper shows that this ambivalence has a long history and results mainly from three problems: (1) The term “progress” carries historical, theoretical and social implications which are not congruent with modern knowledge of the course of evolution; (2) An incongruence exists (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations