Biology and Philosophy

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 329–346 | Cite as

Species concepts and the ontology of evolution

  • Joel Cracraft
Article

Abstract

Biologists and philosophers have long recognized the importance of species, yet species concepts serve two masters, evolutionary theory on the one hand and taxonomy on the other. Much of present-day evolutionary and systematic biology has confounded these two roles primarily through use of the biological species concept. Theories require entities that are real, discrete, irreducible, and comparable. Within the neo-Darwinian synthesis, however, biological species have been treated as real or subjectively delimited entities, discrete or nondiscrete, and they are often capable of being decomposed into other, smaller units. Because of this, biological species are generally not comparable across different groups of organisms, which implies that the ontological structure of evolutionary theory requires modification. Some biologists, including proponents of the biological species concept, have argued that no species concept is universally applicable across all organisms. Such a view means, however, that the history of life cannot be embraced by a common theory of ancestry and descent if that theory uses species as its entities.

These ontological and biological difficulties can be alleviated if species are defined in terms of evolutionary units. The latter are irreducible clusters of reproductively cohesive organisms that are diagnosably distinct from other such clusters. Unlike biological species, which can include two or more evolutionary units, these phylogenetic species are discrete entities in space and time and capable of being compared from one group to the next.

Key words

Species evolutionary theory individuality 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Bock, W. J.: 1977, ‘Foundations and Methods of Evolutionary Classification,’ in M. K. Hecht, P. C. Goody, and B. M. Hecht (eds.),Major Patterns in Vertebrae Evolution, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 851–895.Google Scholar
  2. Bock, W. J.: 1979, ‘The Synthetic Explanation of Macroevolutionary Change — A Reductionistic Approach,’Bulletin Carnegie Museum Natural History 13, 20–69.Google Scholar
  3. Bock, W. J.: 1981, Review of ‘The Evolutionary Synthesis,’ by E. Mayr and W. B. Provine (eds.),Auk 98, 644–646.Google Scholar
  4. Brothers, D. J.: 1985, ‘Species Concepts, Speciation, and Higher Taxa,’Transvaal Museum Monograph 4, 35–42.Google Scholar
  5. Bush, G. L.: 1975, ‘Modes of Animal Speciation,’Annual Review Ecology Systematics 6, 339–364.Google Scholar
  6. Caplan, A.: 1981, ‘Back to Class: A Note on the Ontology of Species,’Philosophy of Science 48, 130–140.Google Scholar
  7. Charlesworth, B., R. Lande, and M. Slatkin: 1982, ‘A Neo-Darwinian Commentary on Macroevolution,’Evolution 36, 474–498.Google Scholar
  8. Cracraft, J.: 1983, ‘Species Concepts and Speciation Analysis,’Current Ornithology 1, 159–187.Google Scholar
  9. Cronquist, A.: 1978, ‘Once Again, What is a species?’,Beltsville Symposium Agricultural Research 2, 3–20.Google Scholar
  10. Dobzhansky, T.: 1935, ‘A Critique of the Species Concept in Biology,’Philosophy of Science 2, 344–355.Google Scholar
  11. Dobzhansky, T.: 1937,Genetics and the Origin of Species, Columbia Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Dobzhansky, T.: 1941,Genetics and the Origin of Species,2nd edition, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Ehrlich, P.: 1961, ‘Has the Biological Species Concept Outlived its Usefulness?’,Systematic Zoology 10, 167–176.Google Scholar
  14. Eldredge, N.: 1985a,Unfinished Synthesis, Oxford Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Eldredge, N.: 1985b, ‘The Ontology of Species,’Transvaal Museum Monograph 4, 17–20.Google Scholar
  16. Eldredge, N. and J. Cracraft: 1980,Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process, Columbia Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Futuyma, D. J.: 1986,Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer, Sunderland, Ma.Google Scholar
  18. Gaukroger, S.: 1978,Explanatory Structures, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, N.J.Google Scholar
  19. Ghiselin, M. T.: 1974, ‘A Radical Solution to the Species Problem,’Systematic Zoology 23, 536–544.Google Scholar
  20. Ghiselin, M. T.: 1981, ‘Categories, Life, and Thinking,’Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4, 269–313.Google Scholar
  21. Ghiselin, M. T.: 1987, ‘Species Concepts, Individuality, and Objectivity’,Biology and Philosophy 4, 000.Google Scholar
  22. Hull, D. L.: 1974,Philosophy of Biological Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Google Scholar
  23. Hull, D. L.: 1976, ‘Are Species Really Individuals?’,Systematic Zoology 25, 174–191.Google Scholar
  24. Hull, D. L.: 1977, ‘The Ontological Status of Species as Evolutionary Units’, in R. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds.),Foundational Problems in the Special Sciences, D. Reidel, Dorcrecht-Holland, pp. 91–102.Google Scholar
  25. Hull, D. L.: 1978, ‘A Matter of Individuality’,Philosophy of Science 45, 335–360.Google Scholar
  26. Hull, D. L.: 1980, ‘Individuality and Selection’,Annual Review Ecology and Systematic 11, 311–332.Google Scholar
  27. Hull, D. L.: 1981a, ‘Units of Evolution: A Metaphysical Essay’, in U. L. Jensen and R. Harre (eds.),The Philosophy of Evolution, Harvester Press, Bringhton, Sussex, pp. 23–44.Google Scholar
  28. Hull, D. L.: 1981b, ‘Kitts and Kitts and Caplan on Species’,Philosophy of Science 48, 141–152.Google Scholar
  29. Kitcher, P.: 1984, ‘Species’,Philosophy of Science 51, 308–333.Google Scholar
  30. Kitts, D. B. and D. J. Kitts: 1979, ‘Biological Species as Natural Kinds’,Philosophy of Science 46, 613–622.Google Scholar
  31. Levin, D.: 1979, ‘The Nature of Plant Species’,Science 204, 381–204.Google Scholar
  32. Mayr, E.: 1940, ‘Speciation Phenomena in Birds’,American Naturalist 74, 249–278.Google Scholar
  33. Mayr, E.: 1942,Systematics and the Origin of Species, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Mayr, E.: 1963,Animal Species and Evolution, harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
  35. Mayr, E.: 1980a, ‘Prologue: Some Thoughts on the History of the Evolutionary Synthesis’, in E. Mayr and W. B. Provine (eds.),The Evolutionary Synthesis, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Ma., pp. 1–48.Google Scholar
  36. Mayr, E.: 1980b, ‘G. G. Simpson’, in E. Mayr and W. B. Provine (eds.),The Evolutionary Synthesis, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Ma., pp. 452–463.Google Scholar
  37. Mayr, E.: 1982,The Growth of Biological Thought, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
  38. Mayr, E.: 1982, ‘The Ontological Status of Species’,Biology and Philosophy 2, 145–166.Google Scholar
  39. Mishler, B. and M. Donoghue: 1982, ‘Species Concepts: A Case for Pluralism’,Systematic Zoology 31, 491–503.Google Scholar
  40. Nelson, G. J. and N. I. Plantnick: 1981,Systematics and Biogeography: Cladistics and Vicariance, Columbia Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Paterson, H. E. H.: 1985, ‘The Recognition Concept of Species’,Transvaal Museum Monograph 4, 21–29.Google Scholar
  42. Popper, K. R.: 1976,Unended Quest, Open Court, La Salle, Illinois.Google Scholar
  43. Raven, P. H.: 1980, ‘Hybridization and the Nature of Species in Higher Plants’,Canadian Botanical Association Bulletin 13 (Suppl.), 3–10.Google Scholar
  44. Rieppel, O.: 1986, ‘Species Are Individuals. A Review and Critique of the Argument’,Evolutionary Biology 20, 283–317.Google Scholar
  45. Rosen, D. E.: 1978, ‘Vicariant Patterns and Historical Explanation in Biogeography’,Systematic Zoology 27, 159–188.Google Scholar
  46. Rosen, D. E.: 1979, ‘Fishes from the Uplands and Intermontane Basin of Guatemala: Revisionary Studies and Comaparative Geography’,Bulletin American Museum Natural History 162, 267–376.Google Scholar
  47. Rosenberg, A.: 1985,The Structure of Biological Science, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  48. Scudder, G. G. E.: 1974, ‘Species Concepts and Speciation’,Canadian Journal Zoology 52, 1121–1134.Google Scholar
  49. Simpson, G. G.: 1944,Tempo and Mode in Evolution, Columbia Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  50. Simpson, G. G.: 1961,Principles of Animal Taxonomy, Columbia Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Sokal, R. R. and T. J. Crovello: 1970, ‘The Biological Species Concept: A Critical Evaluation’,American Naturalist 104, 127–153.Google Scholar
  52. Van Valen, L.: 1976, ‘Ecological Species, Multispecies, and Oaks’,Taxon 25, 233–239.Google Scholar
  53. Vrba, E. S. and N. Eldredge: 1984, ‘Individuals, Heirarchies and Processes: Towards a More Complete Evolutionary Theory’,Paleobiology 10, 146–171.Google Scholar
  54. Vrba, E. S. and S. J. Gould: 1986, ‘The Hierarchical Expansion of Sorting and Selection: Sorting and Selection Cannot Be Equated’,Palaeobiology 12, 217–228.Google Scholar
  55. White, M. J. D.: 1978,Modes of Speciation, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  56. Wiley, E. O.: 1978, ‘The Evolutionary Species Concept Reconsidered’,Systematic Zoology 27, 17–26.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joel Cracraft
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of AnatomyUniversity of IllinoisChicagoU.S.A.
  2. 2.Field Museum of Natural HistoryChicagoU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations