Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T01:26:56.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Propensity Interpretation of Fitness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Susan K. Mills  and
John H. Beatty
Susan K. Mills
Affiliation:
Indiana University
John H. Beatty
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of “fitness” is a notion of central importance to evolutionary theory. Yet the interpretation of this concept and its role in explanations of evolutionary phenomena have remained obscure. We provide a propensity interpretation of fitness, which we argue captures the intended reference of this term as it is used by evolutionary theorists. Using the propensity interpretation of fitness, we provide a Hempelian reconstruction of explanations of evolutionary phenomena, and we show why charges of circularity which have been levelled against explanations in evolutionary theory are mistaken. Finally, we provide a definition of natural selection which follows from the propensity interpretation of fitness, and which handles all the types of selection discussed by biologists, thus improving on extant definitions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 263 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1979

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

†

We wish to thank Professor Michael Ruse, for initially drawing our attention to the problems of the logical status of evolutionary theory, and for insightful criticisms of an early draft of this paper. We are heavily indebted to Alberto Coffa, for providing us with explications both of propensities and of the nature of explanation, and for innumerable criticisms and suggestions. Ron Giere also suggested that the propensity interpretation was a little more complex than we originally suspected. However, we claim complete originality for our mistakes.

References

Bethell, T. (1976) “Darwin's Mistake.” Harper's Magazine, 70–75.Google Scholar
Cain, A. J., and Sheppard, P. M. (1950) “Selection in the Polymorphic Land Snail Cepala Nemoralis.” vol. 4, Heredity: 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cain, A. J., and Sheppard, P. M. (1954) “Natural Selection in Cepaea.” Genetics 39: 89–116.Google Scholar
Cody, M. (1966) “A General Theory of Clutch Size.” Evolution, 20: 174–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coffa, J. A. (1974) “Hempel's Ambiguity.” Syntheses, 28: 141–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffa, J. A. (1977) “Probabilities: Reasonable or True?” Philosophy of Science, 43: 186–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crow, J. F. and Kimura, M. (1970) An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, T. (1970) Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, T., and Levene, H. (1951) “Development of Heterosis Through Natural Selection in Experimental Populations of Drosophila Pseudoobscura.” American Naturalist 85: 246–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, E. B. (1964) Ecological Genetics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Grant, V. (1977) Organismic Evolution. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1964) “The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior. I.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D. (1974) Philosophy of Biological Theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. (1955) “Selection Experiments on Industrial Melanism in the Lepidoptera.” Heredity, 9: 323–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. (1956) “Further Selection Experiments on Industrial Melanism in the Lepidoptera.” Heredity, 10: 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kojima, K. (1971) “Is There a Constant Fitness Value for a Given Genotype?” Evolution, 25: 281–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyburg, H. (1974) British Journal for the Philosophy of Science “Propensities and Probabilities” 25, no.4: 358–374.Google Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1958) The Genetic Basis of Selection. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Levins, R. (1970) “Fitness and Optimization.” Mathematical Topics in Population Genetics. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Levins, R. (1968) Evolution in Changing Environments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manser, A. R. (1965) “The Concept of Evolution.” Philosophy, XL: 18–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mettler, L. E. and Gregg, T. G. (1969) Population Genetics and Evolution. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1974) “Intellectual Autobiography.” The Philosophy of Karl Popper, (Shilpp, ed.). LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1969) “Confirmation and Falsification of Theories of Evolution.” Scientia, 1–29.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1973) The Philosophy of Biology. London: Hutchingson.Google Scholar
Scriven, M. (1959) “Explanation and Prediction in Evolutionary Theory.” Science, 130: 477–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smart, J. J. C. (1963) Philosophy and Scientific Realism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Thoday, J. M. (1953) “Components of Fitness.” Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology, 7: 96–113.Google Scholar
Waddington, C. H. (1968) “The Basic Ideas of Biology.” Towards a Theoretical Biology, vol. 1. Chicago: Aldine.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, B. (1968) Topics in Population Genetics. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Wallace, B. (1963) Further data on the over-dominance of induced mutations. Genetics 48: 633–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M. B. (1970) “Deducing the Consequences of Evolution: A Mathematical Model.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 29: 343–385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, M. B. (1973a) “The Logical Status of Natural Selection and other Evolutionary Controversies: Resolution by Axiomatization.” Methodological Unity of Science (Bunge, ed.). Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel.Google Scholar
Williams, M. B. (1973b) “Falsifiable Predictions of Evolutionary Theory.” Philosophy of Science, 40: 518–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M. B. (1976) “The Logical Structure of Functional Explanations in Biology.” Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976: East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Asso., 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E. O. (1975) Sociobiology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, S. (1955) “Classification of the Factors of Evolution.” Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology, 20: 16–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed