Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dual Causality and the Autonomy of Biology

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Acta Biotheoretica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ernst Mayr’s concept of dual causality in biology with the two forms of causes (proximate and ultimate) continues to provide an essential foundation for the philosophy of biology. They are equivalent to functional (=proximate) and evolutionary (=ultimate) causes with both required for full biological explanations. The natural sciences can be classified into nomological, historical nomological and historical dual causality, the last including only biology. Because evolutionary causality is unique to biology and must be included for all complete biological explanations, biology is autonomous from the physical sciences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achinstein P (1983) The nature of explanation. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcock J, Sherman P (1994) The utility of the proximate-ultimate dichotomy. Ethology 96:58–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allhoff F (ed) (2001) Philosophies of the sciences. A Guide. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariew A (2003) Ernst Mayr’s ‘ultimate/proximate’ distinction reconsidered and reconstructed. Biol Philos 18:553–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayala FJ, Arp R (eds) (2010) Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayala FJ, Dobzhansky Th (eds) (1974) Studies in the philosophy of biology. Reduction and related problems. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker JR (1938) The evolution of breeding seasons. In: De Beer CR (ed) Evolution. Essays on aspects of evolutionary biology. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 161–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1990) Evolutionary anti-reductionism: historical reflections. Biol Philos 5:199–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1994) The proximate/ultimate distinctions in the multiple careers of Ernst Mayr. Biol Philos 8:333–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1959) Preadaptation and multiple evolutionary pathways. Evolution 13:194–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1960) Secondary articulation of the avian mandible. Auk 77:19–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1964) Kinetics of the avian skull. J Morphol 114:1–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1967) The use of adaptive characters in avian classification. In: Snow DW (ed) Proceedings of the XIV international ornithological congress. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp 61–74

  • Bock WJ (1978) Comments on classification as historical narratives. Syst Zool 27:362–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1979) The synthetic explanation of macroevolutionary change—a reductionist approach. Bull Carnegie Mus 13:20–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1991) Explanations in Konstruktionsmorphologie and evolutionary morphology. In: Schmidt-Kitter N, Vogel K (eds) Constructional morphology and evolution. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 9–29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1999a) Avian cranial kinesis revisited. Acta Ornithol 34:115–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (1999b) Cranial kinesis revisited. Zool Anz 238:27–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2000) Explanations in a historical science. In: Peters DS, Weingarten M (eds) Organisms, genes and evolution. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart, pp 33–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2005) Ernst Mayr at 100—a life inside and outside of Ornithology. Ornithol Monogr 58:2–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2006) Ernst Mayr, 1904–2005. Bibliogr Monogr Fellows Royal Soc Lond 52:167–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2007) Explanations in evolutionary theory. J Zool Syst Evolut Res 45:89–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2009) Design—an inappropriate concept in evolutionary theory. J Zool Syst Evolut Res 47:7–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2010) Multiple forms of explanations in Darwinian evolutionary theory. Acta Biotheor 58:65–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ (2014) Ernst Walter Mayr, 1904–2005. In: Biographical memoirs. US National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC

  • Bock WJ, de Witt Miller W (1959) The scansorial foot of the woodpeckers, with comments on the evolution of perching and climbing feet in birds. Am Mus Novit 1931:1–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock WJ, Morioka H (1971) Morphology and evolution of the ectethmoid-mandibular articulation in the meliphagidae (Aves). J Morph 135(1):13–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calcott B (2013) Why how and why aren’t enough: more problems with Mayr’s proximate-ultimate distinction. Biol Philos 28:767–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen J (1951) Stages in the evolution of plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausen J, Keck DD, Hiesey WJ (1951) Experimental studies on the nature of plants. III. Environmental responses of climatic races of Achillea. Carnegie Institution Washington Publication No. 581

  • Cummins CL, Remsen Jr RV (1992) The importance of distinguishing ultimate from proximate causes in the teaching of biology. In: Hills S (ed) History and philosophy of science in science education. Proceedings of the second international conference for history and philosophy in science education, Mathematics Science Teaching Teacher Education Group, vol 1. Queens University, Kingston, Canada, pp 201–210

  • Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. Murray, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1992) On the problems studied in ethology, comparative psychology, and animal behavior. Ethology 92:89–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1994) On the utility of the proximate-ultimate distinction in the study of animal behavior. Ethology 96:63–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1999) The proximate and the ultimate: past, present, and future. Behav Process 46:189–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickins E, Barton RA (2013) Reciprocal causation and the proximate-ultimate distinction. Biol Philos 28:747–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drickamer LC, Gillie LL (1998) Integrating proximate and ultimate causation in the study of vertebrate behavior: methods considerations. Am Zool 38:43–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupré J (2010) It is not possible to reduce biological explanations to explanations in Chemistry And/Or Physics. In: Ayala FJ, Arp R (eds) Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Wiley, NY, pp 32–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis RC (1990) Causes, proximate and ultimate. Philos Biol 5:401–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner A (2013) Ultimate explanations concern the adaptive rationale for organism design. Biol Philos 28:787–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garvey B (2007) Philosophy of biology. McGill-Queens University Press, Montreal and Kingston

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith P (2014) Philosophy of biology. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant V (1991) The evolutionary process. A critical study of evolutionary theory, 2nd edn. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grene M, Depew D (eds) (2004) The philosophy of biology. An episodic history. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (1878) Free Wissenschaft und Free Lehre. E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel E (2015) Freedom in science and teaching. Jefferson Publications, Middletown

    Google Scholar 

  • Haffer J (2007) Ornithology, evolution, and philosophy. The life and science of Ernst Mayr 1904–2005. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haig D (2013) Proximate and ultimate causes: how come? and what for? Biol Philos 28:781–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG, Oppenheim P (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philos Sci 15:135–175 (see Hempel CG 1965)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG (1965) Aspects of scientific explanations. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG (2001) The Philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: studies in science, explanation, and rationality. Fetzer JH (ed) Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Hull DL (1974) Philosophy of biological science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull DL (2001) Science and selection. Essays on biological evolution and the philosophy of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull DL, Ruse M (eds) (1998) The philosophy of biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley JS (1916) Bird-watching and biological science. Some observations on the study of courtship in birds. Auk 33:142–160, 256–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller EF (2010) It is possible to reduce biological explanations to explanations in chemistry and/or physics. In: Ayala FJ, Arp R (eds) Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Wiley, New York, pp 9–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Laland KN, Sterelny K, OglinSee J, Happed W, Ulcer T (2011) Cause and effect in biology revisited: is Mayr’s proximate-ultimate dichotomy still useful? Science 334:1512–1516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laland KN, Odling-Smee J, Hoppitt W, Uller T (2013a) More on how and why: cause and effect in biology revisited. Biol Philos 28:719–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laland KN, Odling-Smee J, Hoppitt W, Uller T (2013b) More on how and why: a response to commentaries. Biol Philos 28:793–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin R (1983) The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Revista di scienza, Revista internazionale di scienza 119:65–82 (reprinted in Levins, R Lewontin R (1985) The dialectic biologist. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)

  • Mayr E (1961) Cause and effect in biology: kinds of causes, predictability, and teleology as viewed by a practicing biologist. Science 134:1501–1506 (see Mayr 1988:24–37)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1962a) Accident or design: the paradox of evolution. In: The evolution of organisms. Proceedings of the Darwinian Centenary. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, pp 1–14 (see Mayr 1976:30-43)

  • Mayr E (1962b) On cause and effect in biology. Science 135:978–981 (see Mayr 1988:24–37)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1974) Teleological and teleonomic: a new analysis. Boston Stud Philos Sci 14:91–117 (see Mayr 1988:38–66)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1976) Evolution and the diversity of life. Selected essays. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1982) The growth of biological thought. Diversity, evolution and inheritances. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1985) How biology differs from the physical sciences. In: Depew DJ, Weber BH (eds) Evolution at a crossroads: the new biology and the new philosophy of science. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 443–463

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1988) Toward a new philosophy of biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1993) Proximate and ultimate causations. Biol Philos 8:93–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1996) The autonomy of biology: the position of biology among the sciences. Q Rev Biol 71:97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1997) This is biology: the science of the living world. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (2001) What evolution is. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (2004a) The autonomy of biology. Ludus Vitalis XII:15–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (2004b) What makes biology unique. Considerations on the autonomy of a scientific discipline. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E (1961) The structure of science: problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Harcourt, Brace and World, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E (1965) Types of causal explanation in science. In: Lerner D (ed) Cause and effect. The Free Press, New York, pp 11–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1959) The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson & Co, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1961) The poverty of Historicism, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, UK (1961 paperback reprint of 3rd edn. Harper Torch books, New York, NY)

  • Popper KR (1974) Autobiography of Karl Popper. In: Shilpp PA (ed) The philosophy of Karl Popper. Open Court, Lacily, pp 2–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg A (1985) The structure of biological science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg A, McShea DW (2008) Philosophy of biology. A contemporary introduction. Routledge, New York, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (1988) Philosophy of biology today. State University of New York Press, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (ed) (1998) Philosophy of biology. Prometheus Books, Amherst

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (ed) (2007) Philosophy of biology, 2nd edn. Prometheus Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon WC (1998) Causality and explanation. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scholl R, Pigliucci M (2015) The proximate–ultimate distinction and evolutionary developmental biology: causal irrelevance versus explanatory abstraction. Biol Philos 30:653–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman P (1998) Levels of analysis. Anim Behav 36:616–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shilpp PA (ed) (1974) The Philosophy of Karl Popper. The library of living philosophers, vol XIV. Open Court, La Salle

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E (1993) Philosophy of biology. Westview Press, Boulder and San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinbacher G (1935) Funktionell-anatomische Untersuchungen an Vogelfüssen mit Wendezehen und Rückzehen. J Ornithol 83:214–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen N (1963) On aims and methods of ethology. Z Tierpsychol 20:410–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watt WB (2013) Causal mechanisms of evolution and the capacity for niche construction. Biol Philos 28:757–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wuketits FM (2004) This is biology. Ernst Mayr and the autonomy of biology as a science. Ludus Vitalis XII:143–160

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Donald A. Dewsbury, John A. Alcock, James V. Remsen for providing comments and additional citations, Mary LeCroy for her assistance in gathering literature, and two anonymous reviewers for critiques of the manuscript all of which lead to improvements of this analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, Columbia University, 1212 Amsterdam Avenue, Mail Box 2428, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Walter J. Bock

Authors
  1. Walter J. Bock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter J. Bock.

Additional information

I would like to dedicate this paper to my colleague of 60 years, Professor Gerd von Wahlert (1925–2016), who always stressed the ecological aspects of evolutionary biology.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bock, W.J. Dual Causality and the Autonomy of Biology. Acta Biotheor 65, 63–79 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-016-9303-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-016-9303-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation