首页> 外文期刊>Acta Biotheoretica >A Philosophical Evaluation of Adaptationism as a Heuristic Strategy
【24h】

A Philosophical Evaluation of Adaptationism as a Heuristic Strategy

机译:适应主义作为一种启发式策略的哲学评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Adaptationism has prompted many a debate in philosophy of biology but the focus is usually on empirical and explanatory issues rather than methodological adaptationism (MA). Likewise, the context of evolutionary biology has provided the grounding for most discussions of the heuristic role of adaptationism. This paper extends the debate by drawing on case studies from physiology and systems biology to discuss the productive and problematic aspects of adaptationism in functional as well as evolutionary studies at different levels of biological organization. Gould and Lewontin's Spandrels-paper famously criticized adaptationist methodology for implying a risk of generating 'blind spots' with respect to nonselective effects on evolution. Some have claimed that this bias can be accommodated through the testing of evolutionary hypotheses. Although this is an important aspect of overcoming the pitfalls of adaptationism, I argue that the issue of methodological biases is broader than the question of testability. I demonstrate the productivity of adaptationist heuristics but also discuss the deeper problematic aspects associated with the imperialistic tendencies of the strong account of MA.
机译:适应主义在生物学哲学上引发了许多争论,但通常重点是经验和解释性问题,而不是方法论适应主义(MA)。同样,进化生物学的背景为适应主义的启发式作用的大多数讨论提供了基础。本文通过借鉴生理学和系统生物学的案例研究来扩大辩论范围,以讨论适应主义在生物组织不同层次的功能研究和进化研究中产生的问题。 Gould和Lewontin的Spandrels论文对适应主义方法论提出了著名的批评,因为它暗示了在对进化的非选择性影响方面会产生“盲点”的风险。一些人声称可以通过检验进化假设来解决这种偏见。尽管这是克服适应主义陷阱的重要方面,但我认为方法论偏见的问题比可测试性的问题更为广泛。我展示了适应主义启发式方法的生产力,还讨论了与MA的强大解释的帝国主义倾向相关的更深层次的问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号