Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-03T01:42:14.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Drift and “Statistically Abstractive Explanation”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Mohan Matthen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A hitherto neglected form of explanation is explored, especially its role in population genetics. “Statistically abstractive explanation” (SA explanation) mandates the suppression of factors probabilistically relevant to an explanandum when these factors are extraneous to the theoretical project being pursued. When these factors are suppressed, the explanandum is rendered uncertain. But this uncertainty traces to the theoretically constrained character of SA explanation, not to any real indeterminacy. Random genetic drift is an artifact of such uncertainty, and it is therefore wrong to reify it as a cause of evolution or as a process in its own right.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 76 , Issue 4 , October 2009 , pp. 464 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

Thanks to Andre Ariew, Roberta Millstein, Michael Strevens, and (especially) Denis Walsh for patient discussion. Thanks also to Thomas Basb⊘ll, Joseph Berkowitz, Margie Morrison, and Eric Schliesser for comments on parts of this essay and for sometimes trenchant criticism. Michael Dickson and two anonymous referees (one reporting to a journal that did not accept this piece) provided valuable advice.

References

Batterman, Robert (2002), The Devil in the Details. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beatty, John (1984), “Chance and Natural Selection”, Chance and Natural Selection 51:183–211.Google Scholar
Brandon, Robert (2006), “The Principle of Drift: Biology's First Law”, The Principle of Drift: Biology's First Law 103:319–335.Google Scholar
Ereshefsky, Marc, and Matthen, Mohan (2005), “Taxonomy, Polymorphism, and History: An Introduction to Population Structure Theory”, Taxonomy, Polymorphism, and History: An Introduction to Population Structure Theory 72:1–21.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay (2002), The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haug, Matthew C. (2007), “Of Mice and Metaphysics: Natural Selection and Realized Population-Level Properties”, Of Mice and Metaphysics: Natural Selection and Realized Population-Level Properties 74:431–451.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1965), Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Keller, Joseph B. (1986), “The Probability of Heads”, The Probability of Heads 93:191–197.Google Scholar
King, Jack Lester, and Jukes, Thomas H. (1969), “Non-Darwinian Evolution”, Non-Darwinian Evolution 164:788–798.Google ScholarPubMed
Kitcher, Philip (1984), “1953 and All That: A Tale of Two Sciences”, 1953 and All That: A Tale of Two Sciences 93:335–373.Google Scholar
Matthen, Mohan, and Ariew, André (2002), “Two Ways of Thinking about Fitness and Natural Selection”, Two Ways of Thinking about Fitness and Natural Selection 99:55–83.Google Scholar
Matthen, Mohan, and Ariew, André (2009), “Selection and Causation”, Selection and Causation 76, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Millstein, Roberta (2002), “Are Random Drift and Natural Selection Conceptually Distinct?”, Are Random Drift and Natural Selection Conceptually Distinct? 17:33–53.Google Scholar
Moran, P. A. P. (1958), “Random Processes in Genetics”, Random Processes in Genetics 54:60–71.Google Scholar
Nowak, Martin A. (2006), Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Equations of Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutynski, Anya (2007), “Neutralism”, in Mohan Matthen and Christopher Stephens (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 3, Philosophy of Biology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 129–140.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Larry, and Sober, Elliott (forthcoming), “Epiphenomenalism—the Do's and the Don’ts”, in Wolters, G. and Machamer, P. (eds.), Studies in Causality: Historical and Contemporary. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (1980), “Evolution, Population Thinking, and Essentialism”, Evolution, Population Thinking, and Essentialism 47:350–383.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott (1984), The Nature of Selection: Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stephens, Christopher (2004), “Selection, Drift, and the ‘Forces' of Evolution”, Selection, Drift, and the ‘Forces' of Evolution 71:550–570.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, and Kitcher, Philip (1988), “The Return of the Gene”, The Return of the Gene 85:339–361.Google Scholar
Strevens, Michael (2003), Bigger than Chaos: Understanding Complexity through Probability. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Walsh, D. M. (2007), “The Pomp of Superfluous Causes: The Interpretation of Evolutionary Theory”, The Pomp of Superfluous Causes: The Interpretation of Evolutionary Theory 74:281–303.Google Scholar