Parsimony and the Fisher–Wright debate
- Anya Plutynski
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In the past five years, there have been a series of papers in the journal Evolution debating the relative significance of two theories of evolution, a neo-Fisherian and a neo-Wrightian theory, where the neo-Fisherians make explicit appeal to parsimony. My aim in this paper is to determine how we can make sense of such an appeal. One interpretation of parsimony takes it that a theory that contains fewer entities or processes, (however we demarcate these) is more parsimonious. On the account that I defend here, parsimony is a ‘local’ virtue. Scientists’ appeals to parsimony are not necessarily an appeal to a theory’s simplicity in the sense of it’s positing fewer mechanisms. Rather, parsimony may be proxy for greater probability or likelihood. I argue that the neo-Fisherians appeal is best understood on this interpretation. And indeed, if we interpret parsimony as either prior probability or likelihood, then we can make better sense of Coyne et al. argument that Wright’s three phase process operates relatively infrequently.
- Carlson E. 1966. The Gene: A Critical History.
- Coyne, J., Barton, N., Turelli, M. (1997) Perspective: a critique of Wright’s shifting balance theory of evolution. Evolution 51: pp. 643-671
- Dobzhansky, T. (1951) Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York
- Gavrilets, S. (1996) On phase three of the shifting balance theory. Evolution 50: pp. 1034-1041
- Gavrilets, S. (1997) Evolution and speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Trend. Ecol. Evol. 12: pp. 307-312 CrossRef
- Gould, S.J., Lewontin, R.C. (1979) The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. Evol. Adapt. Nat. Sel. 205: pp. 581-598
- Jacob, F. (1977) Evolution and tinkering. Science 196: pp. 1161-1166
- Kellogg, V.L. (1903) Darwinism To-day: a Discussion of Present-Day Scientific selection Theories. Bell, London
- Lewontin, R.C. What do population geneticists know and how do they know it?. In: Creath, , Maienschein, eds. (1999) Biology and Epistemology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
- Ockham, W. (1957) Philosophical Writings; A Selection. Nelson, Edinburgh New York
- Newton I. 1729. The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. trans. Andrew Mottevol. 2 (London: Printed for B. Motte), pp.202–205.
- Ruse M. 1993. Are Pictures Really Necessary? The Case of Sewell Wright’s ‘Adaptive Landscapes’ (in Biology: The Non-Propositional Side). PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. 1990, Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers. 1990: 63–77.
- Sober E. 1990. Let’s Razor Ockham’s Razor. Philosophy: J. Roy. Inst. Phil. 1990(Supp): 73–93.
- Sober, E. (1988) Reconstructing the Past: Parsimony, Evolution, and Inference. MIT Press, Cambridge
- Sober, E., Wilson, D.S. (1998) Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA
- Skipper, R. (2002) The Persistence of the RA. Fisher-Sewall Wright Controversy. Biol. Phil. 17: pp. 341-367
- Wade, M., Goodnight, C.J. (Dec. 1998) Perspective: theories of Fisher and Wright in the context of metapopulations: when nature does many small experiments. Evolution 52: pp. 1537-1553
- Williams G.C. 1966. Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Wright S. 1923b. “Mendelain Analysis of Pure Breeds of Livestock II: The Duchess Family of Shorthorns as Bread by Thomas Bates.” Journal of Heredity 14: 405–422. In Provineed. 1986. Evolution: Selected Papers by Sewall WrightUniversity of Chicago Press: Chicago.
- Wright, S. (1932) “The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding, and selection in evolution.”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 1: pp. 356-366
- Parsimony and the Fisher–Wright debate
Biology and Philosophy
Volume 20, Issue 4 , pp 697-713
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- Bayes’ theorem
- Density dependence
- Genetic drift
- Ronald Fisher
- Shifting balance
- Sewall Wright
- Anya Plutynski (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. University of Utah, 260 Central Campus Drive, Room 341, 84112, OSH, Salt Lake City, UT, USA