Context Matters: A Response to Autzen and Okasha's Reply to Takacs and Bourrat.

IF 1.9 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Biological theory Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-26 DOI:10.1007/s13752-024-00455-7
Peter Takacs, Pierrick Bourrat
{"title":"Context Matters: A Response to Autzen and Okasha's Reply to Takacs and Bourrat.","authors":"Peter Takacs, Pierrick Bourrat","doi":"10.1007/s13752-024-00455-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a recent reply to Takacs and Bourrat's article (Biol Philos 37:12, 2022), Autzen and Okasha (Biol Philos 37:37, 2022) question our characterization of the relationship between the geometric mean and arithmetic mean measures of fitness. We here take issue with the claim that our characterization falls prey to the mistakes they highlight. Briefly revisiting what Takacs and Bourrat (Biol Philos 37:12, 2022) accomplished reveals that the key issue of difference concerns cases of deterministic but nonconstant growth. Restricting focus to such cases shows that there is in fact no reason for disagreement.</p>","PeriodicalId":72374,"journal":{"name":"Biological theory","volume":"19 3","pages":"170-176"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11324713/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-024-00455-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a recent reply to Takacs and Bourrat's article (Biol Philos 37:12, 2022), Autzen and Okasha (Biol Philos 37:37, 2022) question our characterization of the relationship between the geometric mean and arithmetic mean measures of fitness. We here take issue with the claim that our characterization falls prey to the mistakes they highlight. Briefly revisiting what Takacs and Bourrat (Biol Philos 37:12, 2022) accomplished reveals that the key issue of difference concerns cases of deterministic but nonconstant growth. Restricting focus to such cases shows that there is in fact no reason for disagreement.

语境很重要:回应 Autzen 和 Okasha 对 Takacs 和 Bourrat 的回复。
在最近对 Takacs 和 Bourrat 的文章(Biol Philos 37:12, 2022)的回复中,Autzen 和 Okasha(Biol Philos 37:37, 2022)质疑了我们对几何平均数与算术平均数之间关系的描述。我们在此不同意他们的说法,即我们的表征陷入了他们所强调的错误。简单回顾一下塔卡茨和布拉特(Biol Philos 37:12, 2022)的研究成果,就会发现分歧的关键问题涉及确定性但非恒定增长的情况。如果把焦点局限于这种情况,就会发现事实上没有理由存在分歧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信