Switch to: References

Citations of:

Force and disposition in evolutionary theory

Elliott Sober

In Christopher Hookway (ed.), Minds, Machines And Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1984)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Do heritable immune responses extend physiological individuality?Sophie Juliane Veigl - 2022 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 44 (4):1-20.details Immunology and its philosophy are a primary source for thinking about biological individuality. Through its discriminatory function, the immune system is believed to delineate organism and environment within one generation, thus defining the physiological individual. Based on the paradigmatic instantiations of immune systems, immune interactions and, thus, the physiological individual are believed to last only for one generation. However, in recent years, transgenerationally persisting immune responses have been reported in several phyla, but the consequences for physiological individuality have not yet (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations
Function, fitness and disposition.Sandra D. Mitchell - 1995 - Biology and Philosophy 10 (1):39-54.details In this paper I discuss recent debates concerning etiological theories of functions. I defend an etiological theory against two criticisms, namely the ability to account for malfunction, and the problem of structural doubles. I then consider the arguments provided by Bigelow and Pargetter (1987) for a more forward looking account of functions as propensities or dispositions. I argue that their approach fails to address the explanatory problematic for which etiological theories were developed. Download Export citation Bookmark 20 citations
The misuse of Sober's selection for/selection of distinction.R. Goode & P. E. Griffiths - 1995 - Biology and Philosophy 10 (1):99-108.details Elliott Sober''s selection for/selection of distinction has been widely used to clarify the idea that some properties of organisms are side-effects of selection processes. It has also been used, however, to choose between different descriptions of an evolutionary product when assigning biological functions to that product. We suggest that there is a characteristic error in these uses of the distinction. Complementary descriptions of function are misrepresented as mutually excluding one another. This error arises from a failure to appreciate that selection (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 25 citations
(1 other version)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.details 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 appropriate level of selection is (...) Download Export citation Bookmark

1