Evolutionary analyses should include pluralistic and falsifiable hypotheses

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):522-523 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Andrews et al. attempt to clarify the standards for determining whether traits are adaptations. The authors argue that tests of adaptationist hypotheses best proceed by assessing the consistency of the traits with the proposed standards. Critical tests of such standards must assess inconsistency – hypotheses must be falsifiable. To fully understand trait evolution, we must consider both adaptive and nonadaptive hypotheses.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,271

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

The basic components of the human mind were not solidified during the Pleistocene epoch.Stephen M. Downes - 2010 - In Francisco José Ayala & Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 243–252.
Historical evidence and human adaptations.Jonathan Kaplan - 2002 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 69:S294-S304.
Common ancestry and natural selection.Elliott Sober & Steven Hecht Orzack - 2003 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (3):423-437.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
112 (#153,884)

6 months
51 (#79,954)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references