“Just not so stories”: Exaptations, spandrels, and constraints
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):517-518 (2002)
Abstract
It is anthropomorphic to speak of Nature designing adaptations for a specific function, as if with conscious intent. Any effect constitutes an adaptive function if it contributes to survival and to reproduction. Natural selection is blind to what might have been the original function. Mutations arise by purest accident and are selected based on whatever fortuitous effects they might produce.DOI
10.1017/s0140525x02340093
My notes
Similar books and articles
Fitness and function.D. M. Walsh - 1996 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (4):553-574.
Lack of evidentiary criteria for exaptations?James L. Dannemiller - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):512-513.
Why specific design is not the mark of the adaptational.Jerome C. Wakefield - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):532-533.
Does past selective efficacy matter to psychology?Paul Sheldon Davies - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):513-514.
Function attributions and functional explanations.Berent Enç - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (3):343-365.
Constraints and spandrels in Gould's structure of evolutionary theory.Todd A. Grantham - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):29-43.
Musings on the concept of exaptation and “creationism”.Charles Crawford - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):511-512.
Towards a pluralistic concept of function function statements in biology.Rob Pranger - 1990 - Acta Biotheoretica 38 (1):63-71.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
51 (#232,303)
6 months
2 (#298,443)
2009-01-28
Downloads
51 (#232,303)
6 months
2 (#298,443)
Historical graph of downloads