Why Selection and Drift Might Be Distinct.

In this paper, it is argued that selection and drift might be distinct. This contradicts recent arguments by Brandon (2005) and Matthen and Ariew (2002) that such a distinction "violates sound probabilistic thinking" (Matthen and Ariew 2002, 62). While their arguments might be valid under certain as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy of Science Vol. 72; no. 5; pp. 1135 - 1146
Autor principal: Pfeifer, Jessica
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Cambridge University Press Dec2005
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=24277114&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 24277114
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2005
      vid: 72
      iid: 5
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        24277114
        10.1086/508122
      ppf: 1135
      ppct: 11
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 103KB
      tig:
        atl: Why Selection and Drift Might Be Distinct.
      aug:
        au: Pfeifer, Jessica
        affil: Department of Philosophy, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250
      su:
        Statistical correlation
        Probability theory
        Natural selection
        Biological evolution
        Heredity
        Physical fitness
      sug:
        subj:
          Statistical correlation
          Probability theory
          Natural selection
          Biological evolution
          Heredity
          Physical fitness
      ab: In this paper, it is argued that selection and drift might be distinct. This contradicts recent arguments by Brandon (2005) and Matthen and Ariew (2002) that such a distinction "violates sound probabilistic thinking" (Matthen and Ariew 2002, 62). While their arguments might be valid under certain assumptions, they overlook a possible way to make sense of the distinction. Whether selection and drift can be thought of as causally distinct, I argue, depends on the source of probabilities in natural selection. In particular, if the probabilities used in defining fitness values are at least partly a result of abstracting from or ignoring certain features of the environment, then selection and drift might in fact be causally distinct.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press 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: Philosophy of Science
      holder: Cambridge University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2005
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N