Adaptationism and the Logic of Research Questions: How to Think Clearly About Evolutionary Causes

Biological Theory 10 (4):DOI: 10.1007/s13752-015-0214-2 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
This article discusses various dangers that accompany the supposedly benign methods in behavioral evoltutionary biology and evolutionary psychology that fall under the framework of "methodological adaptationism." A "Logic of Research Questions" is proposed that aids in clarifying the reasoning problems that arise due to the framework under critique. The live, and widely practiced, " evolutionary factors" framework is offered as the key comparison and alternative. The article goes beyond the traditional critique of Stephen Jay Gould and Richard C. Lewontin, to present problems such as the disappearance of evidence, the mishandling of the null hypothesis, and failures in scientific reasoning, exemplified by a case from human behavioral ecology. In conclusion the paper shows that "methodological adaptationism" does not deserve its benign reputation.
Reprint years
2015
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LLOAAT-2
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-12-23
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
How the Mind Works.Pinker, Steven
The Scientific Image.Van Fraassen, Bas C.
Evolution – the Extended Synthesis.Pigliucci, Massimo & Muller, Gerd (eds.)
Exaptation–A Missing Term in the Science of Form.Gould, Stephen Jay & Vrba, Elisabeth S.

View all 30 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
An Organisational Approach to Biological Communication.Frick, Ramiro; Bich, Leonardo & Moreno, Alvaro
The Nature of Programmed Cell Death.Durand, Pierre M. & Ramsey, Grant

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-07-10

Total views
646 ( #4,325 of 43,689 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
165 ( #2,485 of 43,689 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.