Details

<p>Notes on Contributors ix</p> <p>General Introduction 1</p> <p>References and Further Reading 7</p> <p><b>Part I Is It Possible To Reduce Biological Explanations To Explanations In Chemistry and/or Physics? 13</b></p> <p>Introduction 13</p> <p>References and Further Reading 15</p> <p>1 It is Possible to Reduce Biological Explanations to Explanations in Chemistry and/or Physics 19<br /><i>Evelyn Fox Keller</i></p> <p>2 It is Not Possible to Reduce Biological Explanations to Explanations in Chemistry and/or Physics 32<br /><i>John Dupré</i></p> <p><b>Part II Have Traits Evolved To Function the Way They Do Because of a Past Advantage? 49</b></p> <p>Introduction 49</p> <p>References and Further Reading 51</p> <p>3 Traits Have Evolved to Function the Way They Do Because of a Past Advantage 53<br /><i>Mark Perlman</i></p> <p>4 Traits Have Not Evolved to Function the Way They Do Because of a Past Advantage 72<br /><i>Robert Cummins and Martin Roth</i></p> <p><b>Part III Are Species Real? 87</b></p> <p>Introduction 87</p> <p>References and Further Reading 88</p> <p>5 Species Are Real Biological Entities 91<br /><i>Michael F. Claridge</i></p> <p>6 Species Are Not Uniquely Real Biological Entities 110<br /><i>Brent D. Mishler</i></p> <p><b>Part IV Does Selection Operate Primarily On Genes? 123</b></p> <p>Introduction 123</p> <p>References and Further Reading 125</p> <p>7 Selection Does Operate Primarily on Genes: In Defense of the Gene as the Unit of Selection 127<br /><i>Carmen Sapienza</i></p> <p>8 Selection Does Not Operate Primarily on Genes 141<br /><i>Richard M. Burian</i></p> <p><b>Part V Are Microevolution and Macroevolution Governed By the Same Processes? 165</b></p> <p>Introduction 165</p> <p>References and Further Reading 166</p> <p>9 Microevolution and Macroevolution Are Governed by the Same Processes 169<br /><i>Michael R. Dietrich</i></p> <p>10 Microevolution and Macroevolution Are Not Governed by the Same Processes 180<br /><i>Douglas H. Erwin</i></p> <p><b>Part VI Does Evolutionary Developmental Biology Offer a Significant Challenge To the Neo-Darwinian Paradigm? 195</b></p> <p>Introduction 195</p> <p>References and Further Reading 197</p> <p>11 Evolutionary Developmental Biology Offers a Significant Challenge to the Neo-Darwinian Paradigm 199<br /><i>Manfred D. Laubichler</i></p> <p>12 Evolutionary Developmental Biology Does Not Offer a Significant Challenge to the Neo-Darwinian Paradigm 213<br /><i>Alessandro Minelli</i></p> <p><b>Part VII Were the Basic Components of the Human Mind Solidified During the Pleistocene Epoch? 227</b></p> <p>Introduction 227</p> <p>References and Further Reading 228</p> <p>13 The Basic Components of the Human Mind Were Solidified During the Pleistocene Epoch 231<br /><i>Valerie G. Starratt and Todd K. Shackelford</i></p> <p>14 The Basic Components of the Human Mind Were Not Solidified During the Pleistocene Epoch 243<br /><i>Stephen M. Downes</i></p> <p><b>Part VIII Does Memetics Provide a Useful Way of Understanding Cultural Evolution? 253</b></p> <p>Introduction 253</p> <p>References and Further Reading 254</p> <p>15 Memetics Does Provide a Useful Way of Understanding Cultural Evolution 255<br /><i>Susan Blackmore</i></p> <p>16 Memetics Does Not Provide a Useful Way of Understanding Cultural Evolution: A Developmental Perspective 273<br /><i>William C. Wimsatt</i></p> <p><b>Part IX Can the Biological Sciences Act As a Ground For Ethics? 293</b></p> <p>Introduction 293</p> <p>References and Further Reading 295</p> <p>17 The Biological Sciences Can Act as a Ground for Ethics 297<br /><i>Michael Ruse</i></p> <p>18 What the Biological Sciences Can and Cannot Contribute to Ethics 316<br /><i>Francisco J. Ayala</i></p> <p><b>Part X Is There a Place For Intelligent Design In the Philosophy of Biology? 337</b></p> <p>Introduction 337</p> <p>References and Further Reading 340</p> <p>19 There is a Place for Intelligent Design in the Philosophy of Biology: Intelligent Design in (Philosophy of) Biology: Some Legitimate Roles 343<br /><i>Del Ratzsch</i></p> <p>20 There is No Place for Intelligent Design in the Philosophy of Biology: Intelligent Design is Not Science 364<br /><i>Francisco J. Ayala</i></p> <p>Index 391</p>

<h1> </h1> <p>“All chapters (including the very interesting contributions on the species problem by Claridge and Mishler, as well as the stimulating papers on evolutionary ethics by Ruse and Ayala) serve as an excellent introduction to the most hotly debated topics in the philosophy of biology today.”  (<i>Metascience</i>, 2011)</p> <h1> </h1> "A brief review like this can scarcely do justice to the richness of the ideas discussed in this text or the considerable care that went into its organization. This is, in short, a very fine contribution to the pedagogical literature on philosophy of biology. The editors are to be congratulated for the thoughtfulness that went into producing this text. May it gain the wide acceptance it deserves." (Science & Education, 2010) <p>"Highly recommended. Lower-division undergraduates and above". (Choice, 1 November 2010)</p> <p><i>“Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology</i> is an engaging anthology with many interesting contributions. The strength of the book is the format: two eminent representatives of the biophilosophical community have their say on a pivotal biophilosophical issue.” (</p> <div><em style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Metapsychology, May 2010)</em> <p>"A very fine contribution to the pedagogical literature on philosophy of biology. The editors are to be congratulated for the thoughtfulness that went into producing this text. May it gain the wide acceptance it deserves." (Science & Education, March 2010)</p> </div> <br /> <br />

<p><b>Francisco J. Ayala</b> is Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine, USA. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. In 2001, he received the National Medal of Science. Ayala has published more than 950 articles and is the author or editor of 31 books. He has been named the Renaissance Man of Evolutionary Biology by <i>The New York Times</i>.</p> <p><b>Robert Arp</b> is an analyst at The Analysis Group, LLC who has interests in philosophy of biology and ontology in the informatics sense. He is the author of <i>Scenario Visualization: An Evolutionary Account of Creative Problem Solving</i> (2008), and co-editor of <i>Philosophy of Biology: An Anthology</i> (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009).</p>

<p><b>CONTEMPORARY DEBATES IN PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGY</b></p> <p>"A greatly needed and welcome contribution by excellent scholars, this book invites newcomers and experts alike to think critically about core issues in the philosophy of biology."<br />—<b>Roberta L. Millstein</b>, University of California, Davis</p> <p><i>Contemporary Debates in Philosophy</i> of Biology brings together original essays on some of the most hotly debated questions in this lively and fast-moving field. Are species real? Does selection operate primarily on genes? Can the biological sciences act as a ground for ethics?</p> <p>Each of the ten sections introduces a specific issue within philosophy of biology and offers suggestions for further reading. Pairs of newly commissioned essays by leading scholars discuss the central questions in an engaging head-to-head debate. Together, the essays provide an accessible introduction to philosophy of biology, and a springboard to further discussion. Showcasing original arguments for well-defined positions, as well as clear and concise statements of sophisticated philosophical views, this volume is an excellent resource for professional philosophers, biologists, and students alike.</p>

“A greatly needed and welcome contribution by excellent scholars, this book invites newcomers and experts alike to think critically about core issues in the philosophy of biology.”<br /> –<b>Roberta L. Millstein</b>, University of California, Davis

GB