Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-30T03:13:56.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolution, Phenotypic Selection, and the Units of Selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Timothy Shanahan
Timothy Shanahan*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Loyola Marymount University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years philosophers have attempted to clarify the units of selection controversy in evolutionary biology by offering conceptual analyses of the term ‘unit of selection’. A common feature of many of these analyses is an emphasis on the claim that units of selection are entities exhibiting heritable variation in fitness. In this paper I argue that the demand that units of selection be characterized in terms of heritability is unnecessary, as well as undesirable, on historical, theoretical, and philosophical grounds. I propose a positive account of the proper referent of the term ‘unit of selection’, distinguishing between the processes of evolution and phenotypic selection. The main result of this analysis is greater clarity about the conceptual structure of evolutionary theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , June 1990 , pp. 210 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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

†

I would like to thank Edward Manier and two anonymous referees of this journal for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

References

REFERENCES

Bachmann, C., and Kummer, H. (1980), “Male Assessment of Female Choice in Hamadryas Baboons”, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 6: 315–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, J. (1984), “Chance and Natural Selection”, Philosophy of Science 51: 183–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandon, R. (1981), “A Structural Description of Evolutionary Theory”, in P. D. Asquith and R. N. Giere (eds.), PSA 1980, vol. 2. East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 427–439.Google Scholar
Brandon, R. (1982), “The Levels of Selection”, in P. D. Asquith and T. Nickles (eds.), PSA 1982, vol. 1. East Lansing, Mich.: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 315–323.Google Scholar
Brandon, R., and Burian, R. (eds.) (1984), Genes, Organisms, and Populations: Controversies over the Units of Selection. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Davies, N. (1978), “Territorial Defence in the Speckled Wood Butterfly (Pararqe aeqeria). The Resident Always Wins”, Animal Behaviour 26: 138–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endler, J. A. (1986), Natural Selection in the Wild. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1981), Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 2nd ed. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1930), The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. London: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Futuyma, D. J. (1986), Evolutionary Biology, 2nd ed. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer.Google ScholarPubMed
Gould, S. J., and Vrba, E. (1982), “Exaptation—A Missing Term in the Science of Form”, Paleobiology 8: 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griesemer, J. R., and Wade, M. J. (1988), “Laboratory Models, Causal Explanation, and Group Selection”, Biology and Philosophy 3: 67–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S. (1954), “The Measurement of Natural Selection”, Proceedings of the IX International Congress of Genetics (Caryoloqica supplement) 1: 480–487.Google Scholar
Krebs, J. R., and Davies, N. (1981), An Introduction to Behavioural Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kottler, M. J. (1985) “Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace: Two Decades of Debate over Natural Selection”, in D. Kohn (ed.), The Darwinian Heritage. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 367–432.Google Scholar
Kummer, H. (1971), Primate Societies. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Lande, R., and Arnold, S. J. (1983), “The Measurement of Selection on Correlated Characters”, Evolution 37: 1210–1226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1970), “The Units of Selection”, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1978), “Adaptation”, Scientific American 239: 156–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lloyd, E. A. (1986), “Evaluation of Evidence in Group Selection Debates”, in A. Fine and P. Machamer (eds.), PSA 1986, vol. 1. East Lansing, Mich.: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 483–493.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1974), “The Theory of Games and the Evolution of Animal Conflicts”, Journal of Theoretical Biology 47: 209–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1982), “The Evolution of Social Behaviour—A Classification of Models”, King's College Sociobiology Group (eds.), Current Problems in Sociobiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29–44.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1987), “How to Model Evolution”, in J. Dupré (ed.), The Latest on the Best: Essays on Evolution and Optimality. Cambridge: Bradford/MIT Press, pp. 119–131.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J., and Parker, G. A. (1976), “The Logic of Asymmetric Contests”, Animal Behaviour 24: 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J., and Price, G. R. (1973), “The Logic of Animal Conflict”, Nature 246: 15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayo, D. G., and Gilinsky, N. L. (1987), “Models of Group Selection”, Philosophy of Science 54: 515–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. (1974), “Assessment Strategy and the Evolution of Animal Conflicts”, Journal of Theoretical Biology 47: 223–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanahan, T. (1989), “Discussion: Beatty on Chance and Natural Selection”, Philosophy of Science 56: 484–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, E. (1984), The Nature of Selection: Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus. Cambridge: Bradford/MIT Press.Google Scholar
Williams, G. C. (1966), Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (1975), “A Theory of Group Selection”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 72: 143—146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, D. S. (1979), “Structured Demes and Trait-Group Variations”, The American Naturalist 113: 606–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (1980), The Natural Selection of Populations and Communities. Menlo Park, California: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (1983), “The Group Selection Controversy: History and Current Status”, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 14: 159–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W. (1980), “Reductionistic Research Strategies and Their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy”, in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery, vol. 2. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 213–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W. (1981), “The Units of Selection and the Structure of the Multi-Level Genome”, in P. Asquith and R. Giere (eds.), PSA 1980, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 122–186.Google Scholar
Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1962), Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social Behaviour. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1963), “Intergroup Selection in the Evolution of Social Systems”, Nature 200: 623–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar