Explanatory gaps in evolutionary theory

IF 1.7 1区哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

Biology & Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1007/s10539-024-09957-x

Bendik Hellem Aaby, Gianmaria Dani, Grant Ramsey

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Proponents of the extended evolutionary synthesis have argued that there are explanatory gaps in evolutionary biology that cannot be bridged by standard evolutionary theory. In this paper, we consider what sort of explanatory gaps they are referring to. We outline three possibilities: data-based gaps, implementation-based gaps, and framework-based gaps. We then examine the purported evolutionary gaps and attempt to classify them using this taxonomy. From there we reconsider the significance of the gaps and what they imply for the proposed need for an extended evolutionary synthesis.

查看原文本刊更多论文

进化论中的解释性缺陷

扩展进化综合理论的支持者认为，进化生物学中存在着标准进化理论无法弥补的解释空白。在本文中，我们将探讨他们所指的是哪种解释性空白。我们概述了三种可能性：基于数据的差距、基于实施的差距和基于框架的差距。然后，我们研究了所谓的进化差距，并尝试使用这种分类法对它们进行分类。在此基础上，我们将重新考虑这些差距的意义，以及它们对所提出的扩展进化综述需求的影响。

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

Biology & Philosophy 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

8.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Recent decades have witnessed fascinating and controversial advances in the biological sciences. This journal answers the need for meta-theoretical analysis, both about the very nature of biology, as well as about its social implications. Biology and Philosophy is aimed at a broad readership, drawn from both the sciences and the humanities. The journal subscribes to no specific school of biology, nor of philosophy, and publishes work from authors of all persuasions and all disciplines. The editorial board reflects this attitude in its composition and its world-wide membership. Each issue of Biology and Philosophy carries one or more discussions or comparative reviews, permitting the in-depth study of important works and topics.