Some punctuationists are wrong about the modern synthesis

Philosophy of Science 55 (1):74-86 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Benton Stidd has defended the position that punctuationists are not wrong about the inadequacy of the synthetic theory of evolution for explaining evolution. The thrust of his defense is that arguments to the contrary by Thompson involve a rational reconstruction along logical empiricist lines, which is insensitive to historical and social forces in a way that the Kuhnian Weltanschauung view that he espouses is not. I argue in this paper that Stidd has entirely misunderstood my arguments, that the soundness of my arguments does not depend on acceptance of logical empiricism , and that Stidd fails to establish that punctuated equilibria is a new "paradigm"

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
24 (#639,942)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

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