Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:37:56.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Sociobiology a New Paradigm?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Michael Ruse
Michael Ruse*
Affiliation:
Departments of History and Philosophy University of Guelph
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Is sociobiology a new paradigm? A number of people have claimed that it is. I argue that, sociologically speaking, it may well be. But epistemologically, it is not. The case rests on one's interpretation of the major Darwinian evolutionary mechanism, natural selection. In this note, it is shown that sociobiology relies on an orthodox understanding of selection. Thus, in crucial epistemological respects, sociobiology is continuous with the rest of Darwinian evolutionary theory.

Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 98 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 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.)

References

REFERENCES

Barash, D. P. (1982), Sociobiology and Behavior. 2nd edition. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Brandon, R. N., and Burian, R. M. (1984), Genes, Organisms, Populations. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Caplan, A. L. (1984), “Sociobiology as a strategy in science”, The Monist 67: 143–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, E. N. K., and Levi-Setti, R. (1975), “Trilobite eyes and the optics of Descartes and Huygens”, Nature 254: 663–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutten-Brock, T. H.; Guinnes, F. E.; and Abon, S. D. (1983), Red Deer: Behaviour and Ecology of Two Sexes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1859), On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1871), Descent of Man. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C., and Wallace, A. R. (1958), Evolution by Natural Selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Darwin, F., and Seward, A. C. (1903), More Letters of Charles Darwin. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1976), The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, Th.; Ayala, F. J.; Stebbins, G. L.; and Valentine, J. (1977), Evolution. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Gruber, H. E., and Barrett, P. H., (1974), Darwin on Man. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1964a), “The genetical evolution of social behaviour”, I, Journal of Theoretical Biology 7: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1964b), “The genetical evolution of social behaviour” II, Journal of Theoretical Biology 7: 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King's College Sociobiology Group (eds.). (1982), Current Problems in Sociobiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kottler, M. J. (1976), Isolation and speciation, 1837–1900. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lorenz, K. (1966), On Aggression. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Masterman, M. (1970), “The nature of a paradigm”, in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Lakatos, I., and Musgrave, A. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 59–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1972), “Game theory and the evolution of fighting”, in On Evolution. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1974), “The theory of games and the evolution of animal conflict”, Journal of Theoretical Biology 47: 209–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1976a), “Evolution and the theory of games”, American Science 64: 41–45.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1976b), “Group selection”, Quarterly Review of Biology 51: 277–83.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1984), Preface, August 1983, to “Group selection”. (Originally published in Maynard Smith 1976b; reprinted in Genes, Organisms, Populations, Brandon, R. N. and Burian, R. M. (eds.). Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 238–39.)Google Scholar
Raup, P. M., and Stanley, S. M. (1978), Principles of Paleontology. 2nd edition. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Richards, R. J. (1983), “Why Darwin delayed, or interesting problems and models in the history of science”, Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 19: 45–53.3.0.CO;2-H>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruse, M. (1980), “Charles Darwin and group selection”, Annals of Science 37: 615–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. (1981), “What kind of revolution occurred in geology?” in PSA 1978, Asquith, P. and Hacking, I. (eds.). East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 240–73.Google Scholar
Sober, E. (1981), “Holism, individualism, and the Units of Selection”, in PSA 1980, P. Asquith, and Giere, R. (eds.). East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 93–121.Google Scholar
Stauffer, R. C. (1975), Charles Darwin's Natural Selection: Being the Second Part of His Big Species Book Written from 1856 to 1858. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1971), “The evolution of reciprocal altruism”, Quarterly Review of Biology 46: 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972), “Parental investment and sexual selection”, in Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871–1971, Campbell, B. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
van den Berghe, P. (1983), “Human inbreeding avoidance: Culture in nature”, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6: 91–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. C. (1966), Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. (1975), Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar