The proximate-ultimate distinction and evolutionary developmental biology: causal irrelevance versus explanatory abstraction

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[Raphael Scholl, Massimo Pigliucci]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2015
Enthalten in:
Biology & Philosophy, 30/5(2015-09-01), 653-670
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 605448469
LEADER caa a22 4500
001 605448469
003 CHVBK
005 20210128100136.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 210128e20150901xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.1007/s10539-014-9427-1  |2 doi 
035 |a (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10539-014-9427-1 
245 0 4 |a The proximate-ultimate distinction and evolutionary developmental biology: causal irrelevance versus explanatory abstraction  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [Raphael Scholl, Massimo Pigliucci] 
520 3 |a Mayr's proximate-ultimate distinction has received renewed interest in recent years. Here we discuss its role in arguments about the relevance of developmental to evolutionary biology. We show that two recent critiques of the proximate-ultimate distinction fail to explain why developmental processes in particular should be of interest to evolutionary biologists. We trace these failures to a common problem: both critiques take the proximate-ultimate distinction to neglect specific causal interactions in nature. We argue that this is implausible, and that the distinction should instead be understood in the context of explanatory abstractions in complete causal models of evolutionary change. Once the debate is reframed in this way, the proximate-ultimate distinction's role in arguments against the theoretical significance of evo-devo is seen to rely on a generally implicit premise: that the variation produced by development is abundant, small and undirected. We show that a "lean version” of the proximate-ultimate distinction can be maintained even when this isotropy assumption does not hold. Finally, we connect these considerations to biological practice. We show that the investigation of developmental constraints in evolutionary transitions has long relied on a methodology which foregrounds the explanatory role of developmental processes. It is, however, entirely compatible with the lean version of the proximate-ultimate distinction. 
540 |a Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 2014 
690 7 |a Proximate-ultimate distinction  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Ernst Mayr  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Evolutionary developmental biology  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Niche construction  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Plasticity  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Abstraction  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Methodology  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Pere Alberch  |2 nationallicence 
700 1 |a Scholl  |D Raphael  |u History and Philosophy of Science, Institute of Philosophy, University of Bern, Sidlerstr. 5, CH-3012, Bern, Switzerland  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Pigliucci  |D Massimo  |u Philosophy Program, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York City, NY, USA  |4 aut 
773 0 |t Biology & Philosophy  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 30/5(2015-09-01), 653-670  |x 0169-3867  |q 30:5<653  |1 2015  |2 30  |o 10539 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-014-9427-1  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
900 7 |a Metadata rights reserved  |b Springer special CC-BY-NC licence  |2 nationallicence 
908 |D 1  |a research-article  |2 jats 
949 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |F NATIONALLICENCE  |b NL-springer 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 856  |E 40  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-014-9427-1  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Scholl  |D Raphael  |u History and Philosophy of Science, Institute of Philosophy, University of Bern, Sidlerstr. 5, CH-3012, Bern, Switzerland  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Pigliucci  |D Massimo  |u Philosophy Program, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York City, NY, USA  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 773  |E 0-  |t Biology & Philosophy  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 30/5(2015-09-01), 653-670  |x 0169-3867  |q 30:5<653  |1 2015  |2 30  |o 10539