Random drift and the omniscient viewpoint

Philosophy of Science 63 (3):S10-S18 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Alexander Rosenberg (1994) claims that the omniscient viewpoint of the evolutionary process would have no need for the concept of random drift. However, his argument fails to take into account all of the processes which are considered to be instances of random drift. A consideration of these processes shows that random drift is not eliminable even given a position of omniscience. Furthermore, Rosenberg must take these processes into account in order to support his claims that evolution is deterministic and that evolutionary biology is an instrumental science.

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
553 (#31,329)

6 months
146 (#21,273)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Roberta L. Millstein
University of California, Davis

Citations of this work

An explication of the causal dimension of drift.Peter Gildenhuys - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):521-555.
Evolution.Roberta L. Millstein - 2017 - Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Instrumental Biology or the Disunity of Science.Alexander Rosenberg - 1997 - Philosophical Quarterly 47 (186):120-122.
Chance and natural selection.John Beatty - 1984 - Philosophy of Science 51 (2):183-211.

Add more references