Musing on Means: Fitness, Expectation, and the Principles of Natural Selection

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71 (1):373-389 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

How to measure fitness in the theory of natural selection? A fitness measure that has been proposed in both the biological and the philosophical literature is the expected relative reproductive success. The aim of this article is to examine the relationship between expected relative reproductive success and future actual evolutionary success. Doing so will not only clarify the use of expected relative reproductive success as a fitness measure but also shed light on the role of fitness in the theory of natural selection. _1_ Introduction _2_ The Role of Fitness _3_ Geometric Mean versus Expected Relative Reproductive Success _4_ Reconciliation _5_ Reconciliation Continued _6_ Alternative Justifications _7_ Conclusion

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,592

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Can fitness differences be a cause of evolution?Grant Ramsey - 2013 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 5 (20130604):1-13.
Formal Darwinism: Some questions.Sahotra Sarkar - 2014 - Biology and Philosophy 29 (2):249-257.
The non-existence of a principle of natural selection.Abner Shimony - 1989 - Biology and Philosophy 4 (3):255-273.
Natural Selection and the Maximization of Fitness.Jonathan Birch - 2016 - Biological Reviews 91 (3):712-727.
Fitness, probability and the principles of natural selection.Frederic Bouchard & Alexander Rosenberg - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (4):693-712.
Missing Concepts in Natural Selection Theory Reconstructions.Santiago Ginnobili - 2016 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 38 (3):1-33.
The natures of selection.Tim Lewens - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (2):313-333.
A Structural Description of Evolutionary Theory.Robert N. Brandon - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:427 - 439.
Probability in Biology: The Case of Fitness.Roberta L. Millstein - 2016 - In Alan Hájek & Christopher Hitchcock (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Probability and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 601-622.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-08-23

Downloads
72 (#227,040)

6 months
12 (#208,422)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Bengt Autzen
University College, Cork

References found in this work

The propensity interpretation of fitness.Susan K. Mills & John H. Beatty - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (2):263-286.
Adaptation and Evolutionary Theory.Robert N. Brandon - 1978 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 9 (3):181.
A New Foundation for the Propensity Interpretation of Fitness.Charles H. Pence & Grant Ramsey - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):851-881.
Fitness, probability and the principles of natural selection.Frederic Bouchard & Alexander Rosenberg - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (4):693-712.

View all 13 references / Add more references