Underdetermination and Evidence in the Developmental Plasticity Debate

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70 (1):127-152 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I identify a controversial hypothesis in evolutionary biology called the plasticity-first hypothesis. I argue that the plasticity-first hypothesis is underdetermined and that the most popular means of studying the plasticity-first hypothesis are insufficient to confirm or disconfirm it. I offer a strategy for overcoming this problem. Researchers need to develop a richer middle range theory of plasticity-first evolution that allows them to identify distinctive empirical traces of the hypothesis. They can then use those traces to discriminate between rival explanations of evolutionary episodes. The best tools for developing such a middle range theory are experimental evolution and formal modelling.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,440

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Down to Earth Underdetermination.Gordon Belot - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (2):456-464.
Refusing the devil's bargain: What kind of underdetermination should we take seriously?P. Kyle Stanford - 2001 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S1-.
Closure and Underdetermination Again.Ju Wang - 2014 - Philosophia 42 (4):1129-1140.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-08-31

Downloads
100 (#175,347)

6 months
21 (#129,758)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?