Parsimony and the Fisher–Wright debate

Biology and Philosophy 20 (4):697-713 (2005)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In the past five years, there have been a series of papers in the journal Evolution debating the relative significance of two theories of evolution, a neo-Fisherian and a neo-Wrightian theory, where the neo-Fisherians make explicit appeal to parsimony. My aim in this paper is to determine how we can make sense of such an appeal. One interpretation of parsimony takes it that a theory that contains fewer entities or processes, (however we demarcate these) is more parsimonious. On the account that I defend here, parsimony is a ‘local’ virtue. Scientists’ appeals to parsimony are not necessarily an appeal to a theory’s simplicity in the sense of it’s positing fewer mechanisms. Rather, parsimony may be proxy for greater probability or likelihood. I argue that the neo-Fisherians appeal is best understood on this interpretation. And indeed, if we interpret parsimony as either prior probability or likelihood, then we can make better sense of Coyne et al. argument that Wright’s three phase process operates relatively infrequently.
Reprint years
2005
PhilPapers/Archive ID
PLUPAT-4
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
386 ( #11,357 of 50,299 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #29,519 of 50,299 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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