Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:53:34.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dimensions of Selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Peter Godfrey-Smith  and
Richard Lewontin
Peter Godfrey-Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Stanford University
Richard Lewontin*
Affiliation:
Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University
*
‡Send reprint requests to Peter Godfrey-Smith, Department of Philosophy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305–2155, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Proponents of genic selectionism have claimed that evolutionary processes normally viewed as selection on individuals can be “represented” as selection on alleles. This paper discusses the relationship between mathematical questions about the formal requirements upon state spaces necessary for the representation of different types of evolutionary processes and causal questions about the units of selection in such processes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 373 - 395
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1993

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 would like to thank Marcus Feldman, Deborah Gordon, Philip Kitcher, Elisabeth Lloyd, Elliott Sober, Ken Waters and two anonymous referees for comments on earlier drafts. Thanks to Devin Muldoon for the graphics, and special thanks from PGS to Sarah Otto for numerous corrections and suggestions.

References

Dawkins, R. (1982), The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. W.; Nabholz, M.; and Bodmer, W. F. (1968), “Evolution of the Rh Polymorphism: A Model for the Interaction of Incompatibility, Reproductive Compensation, and Heterozygote Advantage”, American Journal of Human Genetics 21: 171–193.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. W. and Otto, S. P. (1991), “A Comparative Approach to the Population Genetics Theory of Segregation Distortion”, American Naturalist 137: 443–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. (1993), “Additivity and the Units of Selection”, in PSA 1992, vol. 1. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association. In press.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1958), “A General Method for Investigating the Equilibrium of Gene Frequency in a Population”, Genetics 43: 419–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1962), “Interdeme Selection Controlling a Polymorphism in the House Mouse”, American Naturalist 96: 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1968), “The Effect of Differential Viability on the Population Dynamics of t Alleles in the House Mouse”, Evolution 22: 262–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1974), The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. and Dunn, L. C. (1960), “The Evolutionary Dynamics of a Polymorphism in the House Mouse”, Genetics 45: 705–722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lloyd, E. (1988), The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1987), “How to Model Evolution”, in Dupré, J. (ed.), The Latest on the Best: Essays on Optimality and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 119–131.Google Scholar
Sober, E. (1981), “Holism, Individualism, and the Units of Selection”, PSA 1980, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 93–121.Google Scholar
Sober, E. (1984), The Nature of Selection: Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sober, E. and Lewontin, R. C. (1982), “Artifact, Cause and Genic Selection”, Philosophy of Science 49: 157–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterelny, K. and Kitcher, P. S. (1988), “The Return of the Gene”, Journal of Philosophy 85: 339–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, K. (1991), “Tempered Realism about the Force of Selection”, Philosophy of Science 58: 553–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. C. (1966), Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. C. (1980), “Reductionist Research Strategies and Their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy”, in Nickles, T. (ed.), Scientific Discovery: Case Studies, vol. 60. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 213–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar