, Volume 175, Issue 3, pp 405–425 | Cite as

Darwin’s solution to the species problem

  • Marc EreshefskyEmail author


Biologists and philosophers that debate the existence of the species category fall into two camps. Some believe that the species category does not exist and the term ‘species’ should be eliminated from biology. Others believe that with new biological insights or the application of philosophical ideas, we can be confident that the species category exists. This paper offers a different approach to the species problem. We should be skeptical of the species category, but not skeptical of the existence of those taxa biologists call ‘species.’ And despite skepticism over the species category, there are pragmatic reasons for keeping the word ‘species.’ This approach to the species problem is not new. Darwin employed a similar strategy to the species problem 150 years ago.


Darwin Species Species problem Species category Family resemblance General lineage concept Homeostatic property cluster theory 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baum D., Donoghue M. (1995) Choosing among alternative “phylogenetic” species concepts. Systematic Biology 20: 560–573Google Scholar
  2. Beatty J. (1992) Speaking of species: Darwin’s strategy. In: Ereshefsky M. (eds) The units of evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 227–246Google Scholar
  3. Boyd R. (1999) Homeostasis, species and higher taxa. In: Wilson R. (eds) Species: New interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp 141–185Google Scholar
  4. Browne J. (2006) Darwin’s origin of species: A biography. Douglas and McIntyre, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  5. Cantino P.D., Bryant H.N., de Queiroz K., Donoghue M.J., Eriksson T., Hillis D.M., Lee M.S.Y. (1999) Species names in phylogenetic nomenclature. Systematic Biology 48: 790–807. doi: 10.1080/106351599260012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coleman W. (1962) Lyell and the “reality” of species: 1830–1833. Isis 53: 325–338. doi: 10.1086/349595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coyne J., Orr H. (2004) Speciation. Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  8. Darwin, F. (eds) (1877) The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Darwin C. (1964) On the origin of species: A facsimile of the first edition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (Original work published 1859)Google Scholar
  10. Darwin, C. (1975). In R. Stauffer (Ed.), Charles Darwin’s natural selection; being the second part of this big species book written from 1856 to 1858. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. de Queiroz K. (1999) The general lineage concept of species and the defining properties of the species category. In: Wilson R. (eds) Species: New interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 49–90Google Scholar
  12. de Queiroz K. (2005) Different species problems and their resolution. BioEssays 27: 1263–1269. doi: 10.1002/bies.20325 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Queiroz K. (2007) Species concepts and species delimitation. Systematic Biology 56: 879–866. doi: 10.1080/10635150701701083 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Queiroz K., Donoghue M. (1988) Phylogenetic systematics and the species problem. Cladistics 4: 317–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1988.tb00518.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Devitt M. (2008) Biological realisms. In: Dyke H. (eds) From truth to reality: New essays in logic and metaphysics. Routledge, London, pp 43–65Google Scholar
  16. Donoghue M. (1985) A critique of the biological species concept and recommendations for a phylogenetic alternative. The Bryologist 88: 172–181. doi: 10.2307/3243026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doolittle W.F., Bapteste E. (2007) Pattern pluralism and the tree of life hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104: 2043–2049. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0610699104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dupré J. (1993) The disorder of things: Metaphysical foundations of the disunity of science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. Eldredge N. (1985). Unfinished synthesis. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Eldridge N., Cracraft J. (1980) Phylogenetic patterns and the evolutionary process. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Ereshefsky M. (1991) Species, higher taxa, and the units of evolution. Philosophy of Science 58: 84–101. doi: 10.1086/289600 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ereshefsky M. (1992) Eliminative Pluralism. Philosophy of Science 59: 671–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ereshefsky M. (1998) Species pluralism and anti-realism. Philosophy of Science 65: 103–120. doi: 10.1086/392628 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ereshefsky M. (2001) The poverty of the Linnaean hierarchy: A philosophical study of biological taxonomy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferguson J. (2002) On the use of genetic divergence for identifying species. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. Linnean Society of London 75: 509–519. doi: 10.1046/j.1095-8312.2002.00042.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fisher K. (2006) Rank-free monograph: A practical example from the moss clade Leucophanella (Calymperaceae). Systematic Biology 31: 13–30Google Scholar
  27. Forey P. (2002) Phylocode—pain, no gain. Taxon 51: 43–54. doi: 10.2307/1554962 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Franklin L. (2007) Bacteria, sex and systematics. Philosophy of Science 74: 69–95. doi: 10.1086/519476 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frost D., Hillis D. (1990) Species in concept and practice: Herpetological applications. Herpetologica 46: 87–104Google Scholar
  30. Futuyma D. (1986) Evolutionary biology (2nd ed). Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  31. Futuyma D.J. (1998) Evolutionary biology (3rd ed). Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  32. Ghiselin M. (1969) The triumph of the Darwinian method. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  33. Ghiselin M. (1987) Species concepts, individuality, and objectivity. Biology and Philosophy 2: 127–143. doi: 10.1007/BF00057958 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ghiselin M. (1989) Sex and the individuality of species: A reply to Mishler and Brandon. Biology and Philosophy 4: 77–80. doi: 10.1007/BF00144041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ghiselin M. (1997) Metaphysics and the origin of species. SUNY Press, Albany, NYGoogle Scholar
  36. Grant V. (1981) Plant speciation (2nd ed). Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Hempel C. (1965) Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Hendry A., Vamosi S., Latham S., Heilbuth J., Day T. (2000) Questioning species realities. Conservation Genetics 1: 67–76. doi: 10.1023/A:1010133721121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hennig W. (1966) Phylogenetic systematics. University of Illinois Press, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  40. Herbert P., Cywinska A., Ball S., deWaard J. (2003) Biological identification through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences 270: 313–321. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Herbert P., Gregory R. (2005) The promise of barcoding for taxonomy. Systematic Biology 54: 852–859. doi: 10.1080/10635150500354886 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hey J. (2001) The mind of the species problem. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16: 326–329. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02145-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hey J., Waples R., Arnold M., Butlin R., Harrison R. (2003) Understanding and confronting species uncertainty in biology and Conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18: 597–603. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2003.08.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hodge M. (1987) Darwin, species, and the theory of natural selection. In: Roger J., Fischer J. (eds) Histoire du concept d’espèce dans les sciences de la vie. Singer-Polignac, Paris, pp 227–252Google Scholar
  45. Hull, D. (1965). The effect of essentialism on taxonomy: Two thousand years of stasis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 15, 314–326; 16, 1–18.Google Scholar
  46. Hull D. (1978) A matter of individuality. Philosophy of Science 45: 335–360. doi: 10.1086/288811 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hull D. (1987) Genealogical actors in ecological roles. Biology and Philosophy 2: 168–183. doi: 10.1007/BF00057961 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hull D. (1988) Science as a process. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  49. Kitcher P. (1984) Species. Philosophy of Science 51: 308–333. doi: 10.1086/289182 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kohn D. (2008) Darwin’s keystone: The principle of divergence. In: Ruse M., Richards R. (eds) Cambridge companion to the “Origin of Species”. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 87–108Google Scholar
  51. LaPorte E. (2005) Is there a single objective evolutionary tree of life? The Journal of Philosophy 102: 357–374Google Scholar
  52. Lee M. (2003) Species concepts and species reality: Salvaging a Linnaean rank. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16: 179–188. doi: 10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00520.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Maddison W. (1997) Gene trees in species trees. Systematic Biology 46: 523–536. doi: 10.2307/2413694 Google Scholar
  54. Mallet J. (2008) Mayr’s view of Darwin; was Darwin wrong about speciation?. Biological Journal of Linnaean Society 95: 3–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01089.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Marris E. (2007) The species and the specious. Nature 446: 250–253. doi: 10.1038/446250a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mayden R. (2002) On biological species, species concepts and individuation in the natural World. Fish and Fisheries 3: 171–196. doi: 10.1046/j.1467-2979.2002.00086.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mayr E. (1959) Isolation as an evolutionary factor. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 103: 221–230Google Scholar
  58. Mayr E. (1963) Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  59. Mayr E. (1969) Principles of systematic zoology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  60. Mayr E. (1970) Populations, species, and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  61. Mayr E. (1982) The growth of biological thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  62. Mayr E. (1987) The ontological status of species: Scientific progress and philosophical terminology. Biology and Philosophy 2: 145–166. doi: 10.1007/BF00057967 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mill, J. S. (1963). A system of logic. In J. M. Robson (Ed.), The collected works of John Stuart Mill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. (Original work published 1843)Google Scholar
  64. Mishler B. (1999) Getting rid of species? In: Wilson R. (eds) Species: New interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 307–316Google Scholar
  65. Mishler B. (2003) The advantages of rank-free classification for teaching and research. Cladists 19: 157Google Scholar
  66. Mishler B., Budd A. (1990) Species and evolution in clonal organisms—introduction. Systematic Botany 15: 79–85. doi: 10.2307/2419018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Mishler B., Donoghue M. (1982) Species concepts: A case for pluralism. Systematic Zoology 31: 491–503. doi: 10.2307/2413371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mishler B., Theriot E. (2000) The phylogenetic species concept (sensu Mishler and Theriot). In: Wheeler Q., Meier R. (eds) Species concepts and phylogenetic theory: A debate. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 44–54Google Scholar
  69. Peterson A., Navarro-Sigüenza A. (1999) Alternative species concepts as bases for determining priority conservation areas. Conservation Biology 13: 427–431. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.013002427.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pigliucci M. (2003) Species as family resemblance concepts: The (dis-)solution of the species problem? BioEssays 25: 596–602. doi: 10.1002/bies.10284 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pigliucci M., Kaplan J. (2006) Making sense of evolution: Conceptual foundations of evolutionary biology. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  72. Pleijel F., Rouse G. (2000) Least-inclusive taxonomic unit: A new taxonomic concept for biology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences 267: 627–630. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pleijel F., Rouse G. (2000) A new taxon, capricornia (Hesiondae, Polychaeta), illustrating the LITU (‘least-inclusive taxonomic unit’) concept. Zoologica Scripta 29: 157–168. doi: 10.1046/j.1463-6409.2000.00041.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Roselló-Mara R., Amann R. (2001) The species concept for prokaryotes. Microbiological Reviews 25: 39–67Google Scholar
  75. Stackebrandt E. (2006) Defining taxonomic ranks. In: Dworkin M. (eds) Prokayrotes: A handbook of the biology of bacteria Vol. 1. Springer, New York, pp 29–57Google Scholar
  76. Stamos D. (1996) Was Darwin really a species nominalist? Journal of the History of Biology 29: 127–144Google Scholar
  77. Stamos D. (2007) Darwin and the nature of species. SUNY Press, Albany, NYGoogle Scholar
  78. Templeton A. (1992) The meaning of species and speciation: A genetic Perspective. In: Ereshefsky M. (eds) The units of evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 159–185Google Scholar
  79. Tudge C. (1999) The variety of life: A survey and a celebration of all the creatures that have ever lived. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  80. Van Valen L. (1976) Ecological species, multispecies, and oaks. Taxon 25: 233–239. doi: 10.2307/1219444 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Waugh J. (2007) DNA barcoding in animal species: Progress, potential and pitfalls. BioEssays 29: 188–197. doi: 10.1002/bies.20529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Whitfield J. (2007) We are family. Nature 446: 247–249. doi: 10.1038/446247a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wiley E. (1981) Phylogenetics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  84. Wilson R. (2005) Genes and the agents of life: The individual in the fragile sciences: Biology. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  85. Wilson, R., Barker, M., & Brigandt, I. (2009). When traditional essentialism fails: Biological natural kinds. Philosophical Topics, 35(2) (in press).Google Scholar
  86. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed., G.E.M. Anscombe, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  87. Wu C., Ting C. (2004) Genes and speciation. Nature Genetics 5: 114–122. doi: 10.1038/nrg1269 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations