Abstract
This paper presents explication on how paleontologists reconstruct the past using fossils when good modern analogues are not available. I call these pastist methods to differentiate them from presentist methods in which such analogues are available. I do so by presenting two fossil cases: the problematica and graphoglyptids. I describe a forgotten heuristic, “analogue chaining,” that involves jumping from fossil anomaly to fossil anomaly using one to make sense of the other in successive fashion, using the relations between fossils to guide reconstruction. I relate this to the philosophy of historical sciences in four ways. First, that methods like analogue chaining have a “linearity” meaning that there are limited ways in which to learn about specimens using analogues. Second, that they are intrinsically difficult to notice, i.e. invisible. Third, that linearity and invisibility put pressure on some accounts of optimism about historical sciences. Fourth, our cases provide novel forms of optimism based on epistemic enhancement: the phenomena that some questions regarding an event are better answered millions of years after its occurrence.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This term was inspired by Rahman 1982.
Discussing the uses and influences of analogue chaining between Sarle and Seilacher is quite tricky. This is because multiple-to-one analogue models and analogue chaining can themselves be blended together and become hard to identify. My aim here is to describe the paradigmatic cases to help scaffold better historical analyses of the intervening periods whilst adding complexity of philosophical importance.
My first recollection of this term is from the cited GSA Talk presented by Buatois and Mángano in 2016.
References
Bonnin T (2019) Evidential reasoning in historical sciences: applying toulmin schemes to the case of archezoa. Biol Philos 34(30):1–21
Buatois L, Mángano G (2011) Ichnology: organism-substrate interactions in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Buatois L, Mángano G (2016) Congruence of diversity trajectories between body fossils and trace fossils. Geol Soc Am Abstracts Programs. https://doi.org/10.1130/abs/2016AM-286852
Chang H (2004) Inventing temperature: measurement and scientific progress. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Cleland CE (2001) Historical science, experimental science, and the scientific method. Geology 29(11):987–990
Currie A (2015) Marsupial lions and methodological omnivory: function, success and reconstruction in paleobiology. Biol Phil 30(2)
Currie A (2018) Rock, bone, and ruin: An Optimist’s Guide to the Historical Sciences. MIT Press, Massachusetts
Currie A (2019) Epistemic optimism, speculation, and the historical sciences. Philos Theory Pract Biol 11(7)
Danks D, Ippoliti E (eds) (2018B) Building theories: heuristics and hypotheses in sciences. Springer, Berlin
Darden L (2006) Reasoning in biological discoveries: essays on mechanisms, interfield relations, and anomaly resolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Davies NS, Shillito AP (2021) True substrates: the exceptional resolution and unexceptional preservation of deep time snapshots on bedding surfaces. Sedimentology 68(7):3307–3356
Dawson G (2016) Show me the bone: reconstructing prehistoric monsters in nineteenth-century britain and america. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Dresow M (2023) Uniformitarianism re-examined, or the present is the key to the past, except when it isn’t (and even then it kind of is). Perspect Sci 31(4):405–436
de Saporta G (1884) Les Organismes Problématiques des Anciennes Mers. G. Masson, Éditeur, Paris
Finkelman L (2019) Betting & hierarchy in paleontology. Philos Theory Pract Biol 11:9
Frey RW, Seilacher A (1980) Uniformity in marine ichnology. Lethaia 13(3):183–207
Fuchs T (1895) Studien über fucoiden und hieroglyphen. Kaiserlich-Königliche Hof-und Staatsdruckerei, Wien
Harré HR (1970) The principles of scientific thinking. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Hitchcock E (1858) Ichnology of New England: a report on the sandstone of the connecticut valley especially its fossil footmarks, made to the government of the commonwealth of massachusetts. William White, Printer to the State, Boston
Hsieh S, Schassburger A, Plotnick RE (2019) The modern and fossil record of farming behavior. Paleobiology 45(3):395–404. https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2019.25
Lü J, Unwin DM, Jin X, Liu Y, Ji Q (2010) Evidence for modular evolution in a long-tailed pterosaur with a pterodactyloid skull. Procee R Biolog Sci 277(1680):383–389
Manger PR, Hall LS, Pettigrew JD (1998) The development of the external features of the platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus). Philos Trans R Soc London Series B 1372:1115–1125
Manias C (2018) Reconstructing an incomparable organism: the chalicothere in nineteenth and early-twentieth century palaeontology. Hist Philos Life Sci 40(1):1–21
Massalongo A (1855) Zoophycos, novum genus plantarum fossilium. Typis Antonellianis, Veronae
Meli DB (2001) Blood, monsters, and necessity in malpighi’s de polypo cordis. Med Hist 45(4):511–522
Mirza A (2022) Of chimeras, harmony, and kintsugi: towards a historicist epistemology of paleontological reconstruction, theory-change, and exploring heuristics. Perspect Sci 30(4):657–695
Morthekai P (2019) Philosophies for the palaeosciences-a review. Proc Indian Natl Sci Acad 85(1):95–120
Nathorst AG (1881) Om Spar af Några Evertebrerade Djur M. M. Och Deras Paleontologiska Betydelse. PA Norstedt & Söner, Stockholm
Page MD (2021) The role of historical science in methodological actualism. Philos Sci 88(3):461–482
Quiroz LI, Buatois LA, Koji Seike M, Mángano G, Jaramillo C, Sellers AJ (2019) The search for an elusive worm in the tropics, the past as a key to the present, and reverse uniformitarianism. Sci Rep 9:1–8
Rahman F (1982) Islam and modernity: transformation of an intellectual tradition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Rickert H (1986) The limits of concept formation in natural science: a logical introduction to the historical sciences (abridged edition). In: Gary O (ed) And T. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rona PA, Seilacher A, de Vargas C, Gooday AJ, Bernhard JM, Bowser S, Vetriani C, Wirsen CO, Mullineaux L, Robert Sherrell J, Grassle F, Low S, Lutz RA (2009) Paleodictyon nodosum: a living fossil on the deep-sea floor. Deep Sea Res Part II Top Stud Oceanograph 56(19–20):1700–1712
Sarle CJ (1906a) Arthrophycus and daedalus of burrow origin. In: proceedings of the rochester academy of sciences 4: 203–210
Sarle CJ (1906b) Preliminary note on the nature of Taonurus. In: proceedings of the rochester academy of sciences 4: 211–214
Schäfer W (1972) Ecology and palaeoecology of marine environments. In: Craig GY (ed) Trans Irmgard Oertel. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Seilacher A (1962) Paleontological studies on turbidite sedimentation and erosion. J Geol 70(2):227–234
Seilacher A (1977b) Evolution of trace fossil communities. Dev Palaeontol Stratigraph 5:359–376
Seilacher A (1977a) Pattern analysis of Paleodictyon and related trace fossils. In: Peter Crimes (ed.) Trace Fossils 2.Geological Journal Special Issues
Seward AC (1909) II.—notes on fossil plants from the witteberg series of cape colony. Geol Mag 6(11):482–485
Torell O (1869) Petrifica suecana formationis cambricae. Lunds Univ Årsskift 6:1–14
Turner D (2007) Making prehistory: historical science and the scientific realism debate. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Udden JA (1898) Fucoids or coprolites. J Geol 6(2):193–198
Vialov OS (1964) Network structures similar to those made by tadpoles. J Sediment Res 34(3):664–666
Wylie A (1985) The reaction against analogy. Adv Archeol Method Theory 8:63–111
Wylie A (2019) Rock, bone, and ruin: a trace-centric appreciation. Philos Theory Pract Biol 11
Zhang L-J, Zhao Z (2016) Complex behavioural patterns and ethological analysis of the trace fossil Zoophycos: evidence from the Lower Devonian of South China. Lethaia 49(2):275–284
Acknowledgements
I thank Gabriela Mángano and Luis Buatois for more than I can list. This includes invaluable conversations about the past and future of ichnology, direct access to fascinating fossils, and the opportunity to interact with ichnology as a historian and philosopher. I also thank Maximiliano Paz, Romaine Gungeon, Anthony Shillito, Andrei Ichaso Demianiuk, Kai Zou, Debora Mical Campetella, Kaitlin Lindblad, Jack Milligan and Federico Daniel Wenger for their rich perspectives on ichnology and interdisciplinary research. I thank Evan Arnet, Sander Gliboff, David Polly, Jutta Schickore, and Nick Zautra for critically useful comments on various topics in this paper. I am also grateful to Jose Carlos García-Ramos and Laura Piñuela at the Museum of the Jurassic in Asturias, Spain and Jessica Utrup at the Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, USA for access to their incredible fossil-collections. Lastly, I thank two reviewers of Biology & Philosophy for very insightful and encouraging comments on the latest versions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mirza, A. Epistemic enhancement, pastism, and fossil anomalies in paleontology and ichnology. Biol Philos 39, 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-023-09937-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-023-09937-7