Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T04:16:35.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Evidence in Group Selection Debates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Elisabeth A. Lloyd
Elisabeth A. Lloyd*
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The conflation of two fundamentally distinct issues has generated serious confusion in the philosophical and biological literature concerning the units of selection. The questions of how a unit of selection is defined, theoretically, is rarely distinguished from the question of how to determine the empirical accuracy of claims--either specific or general--concerning which unit(s) are undergoing selection processes. In this paper, I begin by refining a definition of the unit of selection, first presented by William Wimsatt, that is grounded in the structure of natural selection models. I then explore the implications of this definition for empirical evaluation of group selection models. I examine an objection to Wimsatt’s definition raised by Elliott Sober, and I conclude by indicating how the proposed refined definition can clarify which sorts of empirical evidence could be brought to bear on group selection controversies.

Type
Part VIII. Biology
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1986 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1986 , 1986 , pp. 483 - 493
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

I would particularly like to thank Dick Lewontin for discussing the units of selection problem with me, and for his helpful advice, criticism, and suggestions. For their valuable comments and criticism, I would also like to thank Bas.van Fraassen, Evelyn Fox Keller, Bill Wimsatt, Steve Orzack, Dick Burian, Robert Brandon, Deborah Gordon, Hamish Spencer, David Hull, and Jim Griesemer.

References

Alexander, R.D and Borgia, S. (1978). “Group Selection, Altruism and the levels of organization of life.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 9: 449-474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, A.J. and Fristrup, K. (1982). “The theory of evolution by natural selection: a hierarchical expansion.” Paleobiology 8: 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asquith, P.D. and Giere, R.N (eds.). (1981). PSA 1980, Volume 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Beatty, J. (1980). “Optimal-design models and the strategy of mode building in evolutionary biology.” Philosophy of Science 47: 532–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, J. (1981). “What’s Wrong with the Received view of Evolutionary theory?” In Asquith and Giere (1981). Pages 397–426.Google Scholar
Beatty, J. (1982). “The Insights and Oversights of Molecular Genetics: The Place of the Evolutionary Perspective.” In PSA 1982 , Volume 1. Edited by P.D. Asquith and T. Niokles. East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 341-355.Google Scholar
Brandon, R.N and Burian, R.M (eds.). (1984). Genes, Organisms, Populations: Controversies over the Units of Selection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fenner, F. (1965). “Myxoma virus and Oryotolagus cuniculus.” In The Genetics of Colonizing Species. Edited by H.G. Baker and G.L. Stebbins. New York: Academic Press. Pages 485-501.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.A (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Futuyma, D. (1979). Evolutionary Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Gilpin, M.E (1975). Group Selection in Predator-Prey Communities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hull, D.L. (1980). “Individuality and Selection.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11: 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, S. and Pimental, D. (1981). “Selection of intermediate rates of increase in parasite-host systems.” American Naturalist 117: 308–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R.C. (1970). “The Units of Selection.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R.C. (1974). “The analysis of variance and the analysis of cause.” American Journal of Human Genetics 26: 400—411.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R.C. (1978). “Adaptation.” Scientific American 23: 156–169.Google Scholar
Lloyd, E.A. (1983). “The Nature of Darwin’s Support for the Theory of Natural Selection.” Philosophy of Science 50: 112–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, E.A. (1984). “A Semantic Approach to the Structure of Population Genetics.” Philosophy of Science “51: 242–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roughgarden, Jonathan. (1979). Theory of Population Genetics and Evolutionary Ecology: An Introduction. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Ruse, Michael. (1980). “Charles Darwin and Group Selection.” Annals of Science 37: 615–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, E. (1981). “Holism, Individualism, and the Units of Selection.” In Asquith and Giere (1981). Pages 93–121.Google Scholar
Sober, E. (1984). The Nature of Selection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1972). “What’s Wrong with the Received View on the Structure of Scientific Theories?” Philosophy of Science 39: 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppe, F. (ed.). (1977). The Structure of Scientific Theories. 2nd ed. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1957). Introduction to Logic. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1967). “What is a Scientific Theory?” In Philosophy of Science Today. Edited by S. Morgenbesser. New York: Meridian. Pages 55-67.Google Scholar
Thompson, P. (1983). “The Structure of Evolutionary Theory: A Semantic Approach.” Studies In History and Philosophy of Science 14: 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. (1985). “Tempo and Mode in Evolution: Punctuated Equilibria and the Modern Synthetic Theory.” Manuscript.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C (1970). “On the Extension of Beth’s Semantics of Physical Theories. ” Philosophy of Science 37: 325–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1972). “A Formal Approach to the Philosophy of Science.” In Paradigms and Paradoxes. Edited by R. Colodny. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, M.J. and McCauley, D.E (1980). “Group Selection: The Phenotypic and Genotypic Differentiation of Small Populations.” Evolution 34: 799–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, D. (1985). “Covariance Mathematics and the Analysis of Multilevel Selection Processes: A New Formulation.” Manuscript.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. (1980). “Reductionist Research Strategies and Their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy.”; In Scientific Discovery; Case Studies. Edited by T. Nickles. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 213–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W. (1981). “Units of Selection and the Structure of the Multi-Level Genome.” In Asquith and Giere (1981). Pages 122–183.Google Scholar