Species Have (Partly) Intrinsic Essences.

The paper defends the doctrine that Linnaean taxa, including species, have essences that are, at least partly, underlying intrinsic, mostly genetic, properties. The consensus among philosophers of biology is that such essentialism is deeply wrong, indeed incompatible with Darwinism. I argue that bio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy of Science Vol. 77; no. 5; pp. 648 - 662
Autor principal: Devitt, Michael
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Cambridge University Press Dec2010
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=59159590&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 59159590
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2010
      vid: 77
      iid: 5
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        59159590
        10.1086/656820
      ppf: 648
      ppct: 14
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 845KB
      tig:
        atl: Species Have (Partly) Intrinsic Essences.
      aug:
        au: Devitt, Michael
        affil: Philosophy Program, Graduate Center of the City University of New York, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY
      su:
        Linnaea
        Species
        Philosophy of biology
        Biological evolution
        Natural selection
        Essentialism (Philosophy)
      sug:
        subj:
          Linnaea
          Species
          Philosophy of biology
          Biological evolution
          Natural selection
          Essentialism (Philosophy)
      ab: The paper defends the doctrine that Linnaean taxa, including species, have essences that are, at least partly, underlying intrinsic, mostly genetic, properties. The consensus among philosophers of biology is that such essentialism is deeply wrong, indeed incompatible with Darwinism. I argue that biological generalizations about the morphology, physiology, and behavior of species require structural explanations that must advert to these essential properties. The paper concludes by summarizing my responses to the objection that, according to current "species concepts," species are relational, and to the objection that essentialism cannot accommodate features of Darwinism associated with variation and change.
      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: 2010
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N