Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ernst Mayr's 'ultimate/proximate' distinction reconsidered and reconstructed

  • Published:
Biology and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It's been 41 years since the publication of Ernst Mayr's “Cause and Effect in Biology” wherein Mayr most clearly develops his version of the influential distinction between ultimate and proximate causes in biology. In critically assessing Mayr's essay I uncover false statements and red-herrings about biological explanation. Nevertheless, I argue to uphold an analogue of the ultimate/proximate distinction as it refers to two different kinds of explanations, one dynamical the other statistical.

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

  • Alcock J. and Sherman P. 1994. The Utility of the Proximate-Ultimate Dichotomy in Ethology. Ethology 96: 58-62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amundson R. 2001. Adaptation and Development: On the Lack of Common Ground. In: Orzack S.H. and Sober E. (eds), Adaptation and Optimality. Cambridge U. Press, pp. 303-334.

  • Ariew A. 1998. The Probabilistic Character of Evolutionary Explanations. Biology and Philosophy 13: 245-253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J. 1994. The Proximate/Ultimate Distinction in the Multiple Careers of Ernst Mayr. Biology and Philosophy 9: 333-356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigelow and Pargetter 1988. Functions. Journal of Philosophy.

  • Enç B. 1979. Function Attributions and Functional Explanation. Philosophy of Science 46: 343-365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis 1990. Causes, Proximate and Ultimate. Biology and Philosophy 5: 401-415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin R.C. 2000. The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism, and Environment. Harvard U. Press.

  • Lickliter R. and Berry T.D. 1990. Developmental Review 10: 348-364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthen M. 1997. Teleology and the Product Analogy. Australasian Journal of Philosophy.

  • Matthen M. and Ariew A. 2002. Two ways of Thinking about Fitness and Natural Selection. Journal of Philosophy 49: 55-83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E. 1993. Proximate and Ultimate Causation. Biology and Philosophy 8: 95-98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E. 1994. Response to John Beatty. Biology and Philosophy 9: 359-371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E. 1961. Cause and Effect in Biology. Science 131: 1501-1506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E. 1977. Teleology Revisted. Journal of Philosophy 74: 261-301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg A. 1978. The Supervenience of Biological Concepts. Philosophy of Science 45: 368-386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E. 1984. The Nature of Selection: Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus. MIT Press.

  • Sober E. 2000. Philosophy of Biology. 2nd edn. Westview Press.

  • Walsh D. and Ariew A. 1996. A Taxonomy of Functions. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26 Reprinted (1999) in D. Buller (ed.) Function, Selection, and Design, State University of New York Press, 257-280: 493-514.

  • Walsh D., Lewens T. and Ariew A forthcoming 2002. Trials of Life. Philosophy of Science.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, 02881, USA

    André Ariew

Authors
  1. André Ariew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ariew, A. Ernst Mayr's 'ultimate/proximate' distinction reconsidered and reconstructed. Biology & Philosophy 18, 553–565 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025565119032

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025565119032

Search

Navigation