Causalism versus Propensionism in the Philosophy of Biology: A Case of Philosophical Underdetermination?

This paper has two objectives: (1) to define philosophical underdetermination in contrast with the usual empirical underdetermination that has been invoked by so many philosophers of science, expanding on recent work in ethics regarding moral underdetermination; (2) to prove that the debate between...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Filozofia Vol. 79; no. 10; pp. 1083 - 1097
Autor principal: CERNEA, MIHAIL-VALENTIN
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Filozofia 2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=182042037&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 182042037
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0046385X
        1VQE
      jtl: Filozofia
      issn: 0046385X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: 2024
      vid: 79
      iid: 10
      pid: 55711
      pub: Filozofia
    artinfo:
      ui:
        182042037
        10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.10.2
      ppf: 1083
      ppct: 14
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 672KB
      tig:
        atl: Causalism versus Propensionism in the Philosophy of Biology: A Case of Philosophical Underdetermination?
      aug:
        au: CERNEA, MIHAIL-VALENTIN
        affil: Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași, Iași, Romania
      su:
        Causation (Philosophy)
        Ethics
        Natural selection
        Structural analysis (Engineering)
        Philosophers
      sug:
        subj:
          Causation (Philosophy)
          Ethics
          Natural selection
          Structural analysis (Engineering)
          Philosophers
      keyword:
        causalism
        causation
        moral underdetermination
        philosophy of biology
        propensionism
        underdetermination
      ab: This paper has two objectives: (1) to define philosophical underdetermination in contrast with the usual empirical underdetermination that has been invoked by so many philosophers of science, expanding on recent work in ethics regarding moral underdetermination; (2) to prove that the debate between the causalist and propensionist interpretations of causation in the structure of evolutionary theory is better understood when we consider the two positions philosophically underdetermined. This means that we cannot decide between the two interpretations of the notion of cause implied by natural selection by appealing to scientific practice. If philosophical interpretations of science are underdetermined in the way outlined in this paper, then the only way to move the debate forward is through more thorough philosophical work and theoretical refinements.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Filozofia is the property of Filozofia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Filozofia
      holder: Filozofia
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2024
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N