Engineering and evolvability

Biology and Philosophy 29 (3):293-313 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Comparing engineering to evolution typically involves adaptationist thinking, where well-designed artifacts are likened to well-adapted organisms, and the process of evolution is likened to the process of design. A quite different comparison is made when biologists focus on evolvability instead of adaptationism. Here, the idea is that complex integrated systems, whether evolved or engineered, share universal principles that affect the way they change over time. This shift from adaptationism to evolvability is a significant move for, as I argue, we can make sense of these universal principles without making any adaptationism claims. Furthermore, evolvability highlights important aspects of engineering that are ignored in the adaptationist debates. I introduce some novel engineering examples that incorporate these key neglected aspects, and use these examples to challenge some commonly cited contrasts between engineering and evolution, and to highlight some novel resemblances that have gone unnoticed

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,139

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

What Evolvability Really Is.Rachael L. Brown - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (3):axt014.
Is evolvability evolvable?Massimo Pigliucci - 2008 - Nature Reviews Genetics 9:75-82.
Seven types of adaptationism.Tim Lewens - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (2):161-182.
Adaptationism and engineering.Tim Lewens - 2002 - Biology and Philosophy 17 (1):1-31.
Progress in Evolutionary Economics.James Maclaurin & Tim Cochrane - 2012 - Journal of Bioeconomics 14 (2):101-14.
Evolvability, dispositions, and intrinsicality.Alan C. Love - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1015-1027.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-01

Downloads
67 (#230,235)

6 months
11 (#170,645)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brett Calcott
University of Sydney

Citations of this work

The Machine Conception of the Organism in Development and Evolution: A Critical Analysis.Daniel J. Nicholson - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 48:162-174.
Design sans adaptation.Sara Green, Arnon Levy & William Bechtel - 2015 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 5 (1):15-29.
Contingency and History.Kim Sterelny - 2016 - Philosophy of Science 83 (4):521-539.
Multiple Realizability as a design heuristic in biological engineering.Rami Koskinen - 2018 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 9 (1):15.
Brain regions as difference-makers.Colin Klein - 2017 - Philosophical Psychology 30 (1-2):1-20.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Darwin's Dangerous Idea.Daniel Dennett - 1994 - Behavior and Philosophy 24 (2):169-174.
IIā€”James Woodward: Mechanistic Explanation: Its Scope and Limits.James Woodward - 2013 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 87 (1):39-65.
Is evolvability evolvable?Massimo Pigliucci - 2008 - Nature Reviews Genetics 9:75-82.

View all 21 references / Add more references