Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:16:35.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolutionary Synthesis: A Search for The Strategy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Juha Tuomi
Juha Tuomi*
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology, Theoretical Ecology, Lund University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The goal of evolutionary theory is to (a) specify the general causal structure of evolving systems and (b) analyze evolutionary consequences that are expected to result from the proposed structure of the model systems. Biologists frequently emphasize the hypothetico-deductive method in evolutionary theory. I will show that this method primarily provides a tactical device for (b), while evolutionary synthesis requires a foundation of a unifying conceptual model for (a). Therefore, any successful strategy for a new synthesis requires both a new conceptual insight of evolving systems, and tactical devices for analyzing new specific aspects of the evolutionary process.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , September 1992 , pp. 429 - 438
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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

†

Send reprint requests to the author, Department of Ecology, Theoretical Ecology, Lund University, Ecology Building, S-223 62 Lund, SWEDEN.

References

Bradie, M. and Gromko, M. (1981), “The Status of the Principle of Natural Selection”, Nature and System 3: 3–12.Google Scholar
Bunge, M. (1973), Method, Model and Matter. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunge, M. (1978), “A Model of Evolution”, Applied Mathematical Modelling 2: 201–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burian, R. M. (1988), “Challenges to the Evolutionary Synthesis”, Evolutionary Biology 23: 247–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, L. W. (1987), The Evolution of Individuality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Caplan, A. L. (1978), “Testability, Disreputability, and the Structure of the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution”, Erkenntnis 13: 261–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darlington, P. J., Jr, . (1983), “Evolution: Questions for the Modern Theory”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 80: 1960–1963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darwin, C. ([1872] 1962), The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. 6th ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ghiselin, M. T. (1969), The Triumph of the Darwinian Method. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hodge, J. (1977), “The Structure and Strategy of Darwin's Long Argument”, British Journal of the History of Science 10: 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1958), The Genetic Basis of Selection. New York: Wiley & Son.Google Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1959), “The Concept of Natural Selection: A Centennial View”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 103: 173–182.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. W. (1980), “Evolution: A System of Theories”, Perspectives of Biology and Medicine 23: 551–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1989), Evolutionary Genetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1982), The Growth of Biological Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1988), Toward a New Philosophy of Biology: Observation of an Evolutionist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nurmi, H. (1975), “Nature and Criteria of Systems Models in the Social Sciences”, Journal of Cybernetics 5(2): 35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Recker, D. A. (1987), “The Structure of Darwin's Argument Strategy in the Origin of Species”, Origin of Species 54: 147–175.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1971), “Natural Selection in the Origin of Species”, Origin of Species 1: 311–351.Google ScholarPubMed
Ruse, M. (1973), The Philosophy of Biology. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1975), “Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution: An Analysis”, Journal of the History of Biology 8: 219–241.Google ScholarPubMed
Sintonen, M. (1990), “Discussion: Darwin's Long and Short Arguments”, Philosophy of Science 57: 677–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuomi, J. (1981), “The Structure and Dynamics of Darwinian Evolutionary Theory”, Systematic Zoology 30: 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuomi, J. and Haukioja, E. (1979), “Predictability of the Theory of Natural Selection: An Analysis of the Structure of the Darwinian Theory”, Savonia 3: 1–8.Google Scholar
Tuomi, J.; Vuorisalo, T.; and Laihonen, P. (1988), “Components of Selection: An Expanded Theory of Natural Selection”, in Jong, G. de (ed.), Population Genetics and Evolution. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valen, L. (1976), “Domains, Deduction, the Predictive Method, and Darwin”, Evolutionary Theory 1: 231–245.Google Scholar
Wassermann, G. D. (1981), “On the Nature of the Theory of Evolution”, Philosophy of Science 48: 416–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M. (1970), “Deducing the Consequences of Selection: A Mathematical Model”, Journal of Theoretical Biology 29: 343–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (1980), “Genic and Organismic Selection”, Evolution 34: 825–843.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed