Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Perspectives on Theory Change in Evolutionary Biology

Workshop ‘The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: Philosophical and Historical Dimensions’, Ruhr University Bochum, Germany, March 21–22, 2019

  • Report
  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Notes

  1. See http://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com.

  2. See https://evolutionevolving.org/.

References

  • Baedke, J. (2017). Expanding views of evolution and causality. Journal for General Philosophy of Science,48(4), 591–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baedke, J. (2018). O Organism, Where art thou? Old and new challenges for organism-centered biology. Journal of the History of Biology, 52(2), 293–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-018-9549-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bapteste, E., & Huneman, P. (2018). Towards a dynamic interaction network of life to unify and expand the evolutionary theory. BMC Biology,16(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-018-0531-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boumans, M., & Leonelli, S. (2013). Introduction: On the philosophy of science in practice. Journal for General Philosophy of Science,44(2), 259–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I. (2010). Beyond reduction and pluralism: Toward an epistemology of explanatory integration in biology. Erkenntnis,73(3), 295–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brun, G. (2016). Explication as a method of conceptual re-engineering. Erkenntnis,81(6), 1211–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casanueva-López, M., & Vergara-Silva, F. (2018). Teoría de construcción de nicho, “Síntesis Evolutiva Extendida” y filosofía de la ciencia: discusiones pendientes. In J. Muñoz-Rubio (Coord.), La biología evolutiva contemporánea: ¿una revolución más en la ciencia? (pp. 299–355). Ciudad de México: CEIICH, UNAM.

  • Craig, L. (2010). The so-called extended synthesis and population genetics. Biological Theory,5(2), 117–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culp, S., & Kitcher, P. (1989). Theory structure and theory change in contemporary molecular biology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,40(4), 459–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darden, L. (1991). Theory change in science: Strategies from Mendelian genetics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Depew, D. J., & Weber, B. H. (2013). Challenging darwinism: Expanding, extending, replacing. In M. Ruse (Ed.), The Cambridge encyclopedia of Darwin and evolutionary thought (pp. 405–411). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge, N. (1985). Unfinished synthesis: Biological hierarchies and modern evolutionary thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler, J. A., & McLellan, T. (1988). The processes of evolution: Toward a newer synthesis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,19(1), 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esposito, M. (2013). Romantic biology, 1890–1945. London: Pickering & Chatto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fábregas-Tejeda, A., & Vergara-Silva, F. (2018). The emerging structure of the extended evolutionary synthesis: Where does Evo-Devo fit in? Theory in Biosciences,137(2), 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammerstein, P. (1996). Darwinian adaptation, population genetics and the streetcar theory of evolution. Journal of Mathematical Biology,34(5–6), 511–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helanterä, H. (2011). Extending the modern synthesis with ants: Ant encounters. Biology and Philosophy,26(6), 935–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka, E., & Lamb, M. (2008). Soft inheritance: Challenging the modern synthesis. Genetics and Molecular Biology,31(2), 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlin, S. (1975). General two-locus selection models: Some objectives, results and interpretations. Theoretical Population Biology,7(3), 364–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laland, K., Uller, T., Feldman, M. W., Sterelny, K., et al. (2014). Does evolutionary theory need a rethink? Yes, urgently. Nature,514(7521), 161–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laland, K., Uller, T., Feldman, M. W., Sterelny, K., et al. (2015). The extended evolutionary synthesis: Its structure, assumptions and predictions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,282(1813), 20151019. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L., Donovan, A., Laudan, R., Barker, P., et al. (1986). Scientific change: Philosophical models and historical research. Synthese,69(2), 141–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, A. C. (Ed.). (2015). Conceptual change in biology: Scientific and philosophical perspectives on evolution and development. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, J. (1978). Optimisation theory in evolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,9, 31–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G. B. (2007). Evo-Devo: Extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nature Reviews Genetics,8, 943–949. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G. B., & Newman, S. A. (Eds.). (2003). Origination of organismal form: Beyond the gene in developmental and evolutionary biology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G. B., & Pigliucci, M. (2010). Extended synthesis: Theory expansion or alternative? Biological Theory, 5(3), 275–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, D. J., & Gawne, R. (2015). Neither logical empiricism nor vitalism, but organicism: What the philosophy of biology was. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences,37(4), 345–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, E. L. (2016). The life organic. The theoretical biology club and the roots of epigenetics. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M. (2007). Do we need an extended evolutionary synthesis? Evolution,61(12), 2743–2749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M., & Müller, G. B. (Eds.). (2010a). Evolution: The extended synthesis. Boston: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M., & Müller, G. B. (2010b). Elements of an extended evolutionary synthesis. In M. Pigliucci & G. B. Müller (Eds.), Evolution: The Extended Synthesis (pp. 3–17). Boston: The MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Potochnik, A. (2016). Scientific explanation: Putting communication first. Philosophy of Science,83(5), 721–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potochnik, A. (2017). Idealization and the aims of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O. (2016). Phylogenetic systematics: Haeckel to Hennig. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Uller, T., & Helanterä, H. (2019). Niche construction and conceptual change in evolutionary biology. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 70(2), 351–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wray, G. A., Hoekstra, H. E., Futuyma, D. J., Lenski, R. E., et al. (2014). Does evolutionary theory need a rethink? No, all is well. Nature,514(7521), 161–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Dan Nicholson, Francisco Vergara-Silva, Ricardo Muñiz, Andrew Buskell, Kevin Laland, Katrina Falkenberg, and especially Jan Baedke for reading previous versions of this workshop report, and for pointing out ways to improve it. Any mistake or misstatement of opinions is entirely my fault. I acknowledge the financial support provided by the LabExchange program of Ruhr University Bochum to attend to this workshop. I also thank Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología and Posgrado en Filosofía de la Ciencia, UNAM for additional funding. I acknowledge the attentive editorial assistance of Helmut Pulte. Last but not least, I sincerely thank all the speakers and attendees of the workshop for creating such an intellectually stimulating atmosphere to discuss philosophical and historical problems related to the EES.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria S/N, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico

    Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda

  2. Posgrado en Filosofía de la Ciencia, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

    Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda

Authors
  1. Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fábregas-Tejeda, A. New Perspectives on Theory Change in Evolutionary Biology. J Gen Philos Sci 50, 573–581 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-019-09466-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-019-09466-6

Search

Navigation