Advertisement

Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 175–180 | Cite as

Has Grafen formalized Darwin?

Commentary on Grafen’s ‘The Formal Darwinism project in outline’
  • Jonathan BirchEmail author
Article

Abstract

One key aim of Grafen’s Formal Darwinism project is to formalize ‘modern biology’s understanding and updating of Darwin’s central argument’. In this commentary, I consider whether Grafen has succeeded in this aim.

Keywords

Formal Darwinism Darwin Cumulative adaptation Apparent design 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I thank Anthony Edwards, Warren Ewens, Rufus Johnstone, Tim Lewens, Samir Okasha, Cedric Paternotte and John Welch for their extensive and very helpful comments.

References

  1. Birch J (2012) Robust processes and teleological language. Eur J Philos Sci 3:299–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Casler K, Kelemen D (2008) Developmental continuity in teleo-functional explanation: reasoning about nature in Romanian Romani adults. J Cogn Dev 9:340–362Google Scholar
  3. Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Dawkins R (1986) The blind watchmaker: why the evidence of evolution reveals a world without design. W. W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Dennett DC (1995) Darwin’s dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. Simon & Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Grafen A (2007) The formal Darwinism project: a mid-term report. J Evol Biol 20:1243–1254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kelemen D (1999) The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children. Cognition 70:241–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kelemen D (2004) Are children ‘intuitive theists’? Purpose and intelligent design in children’s reasoning about nature. Psychol Sci 15:295–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kelemen D, Carey S (2007) The essence of artifacts: developing the design stance. In: Laurence S, Margolis E (eds) Creations of the mind: theories of artifacts and their representation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 212–230Google Scholar
  10. Kelemen D, Rosset E (2009) The human function compunction: teleological explanation in adults. Cognition 111:138–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lewens T (2005) The problems of biological design. R Inst Philos Suppl 56:177–191Google Scholar
  12. Lombrozo T, Carey S (2006) Functional explanation and the function of explanation. Cognition 99:167–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sober E (2011) Did Darwin write the Origin backwards?. Prometheus, AmherstGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Christ’s CollegeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations