Form and function in the biological debate on constraints

Authors

  • Juan Pablo Bermúdez Rey Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Keywords:

Constraint, adaptationism, pluralism, spandrel, Gould, form, function

Abstract

this paper intends to account for the philosophical struggle between two positions in contemporary
biology, adaptationism and pluralism, regarding the concept of constraint. Adaptationists claim that everything constraints have to offer to the study of life is already contained, or can be contained, in the adaptive study of evolutionary history of organisms, whereas pluralists affirm there is a certain kind of constraints whose study cannot be executed by evolutionary biology but is to be accomplished by developmental biology. This essay presents the path taken by the controversy from its origin in Gould and Lewontin's classic text (1979), The Spandrels of San Marco, to the distinction between two kinds of constraint proposed by Amundson (1994) in Two Concepts of Constraint, examining the adaptive criticisms to pluralism and stating problems yet to be solved

|Abstract
= 101 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 379 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Juan Pablo Bermúdez Rey, Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Philosophy Department of Philosophy- National University of Colombia (Bogotá)

References

Alberch, P (1982) “Developmental Constraints in Evolutionary Processes”, en: Evolution and Development, ed. J. T. Bonner, New York, Springer-Verlag, pp. 313-332.

Amundson, Ron (1994) “Two Concepts of Constraint: Adaptationism and the Challenge from Developmental Biology”, Philosophy of Science, 61, pp. 556-578.

Aristóteles [Met.] (1924) Metaphysics, ed. D. Ross, Oxford , Oxford University Press.

Dawkins, Richard (1998) Escalando el monte improbable, Barcelona, Tusquets. Dennett, Daniel (1999) La peligrosa idea de Darwin, Barcelona, Galaxia Gutemberg. Finlay, B.; Darlington, R.; Nicastro, N. (2001) “Developmental Structure in Brain Evolution”, Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 24, pp. 263-308.

Gould, Stephen Jay (1975) “Allometry in Primates, with Emphasis on Scaling and the Evolution of the Brain”, Contributions to Primatology, 5, pp. 244-292.

Gould, Stephen Jay & Lewontin, Richard (1979). “The Spandrels of San Marco & the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1161 pp. 581-598.

____________ (1997) Evolution: The Pleasures of Pluralism [Reseña de Dennett (1995).] New York Review of Books (online: http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Debate/Gould.html)

Maynard Smith, J.; Burian, R.; Kauffman, S.; Alberch, P.; Campbell, J; Goodwin, B.; Lande, R.; Raup, D.; Wolpert, L. (1985) “Developmental Constraints & Evolution”, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 60, pp. 265-287.

Mayr, Ernst (2001) What Evolution Is, New York, Basic.

Sober, Elliot (1994) “Six Sayings About Adaptationism”, en: The Philosophy of Biology, ed. D. Hull & M. Ruse, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 72-86.

Published

2014-02-04

How to Cite

Bermúdez Rey, J. P. (2014). Form and function in the biological debate on constraints. Versiones. Philosophy’s Journal, (4), 43–55. Retrieved from https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/versiones/article/view/18334

Issue

Section

Artículos