Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:27:53.794Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is There an Empirical Disagreement between Genic and Genotypic Selection Models? A Response to Brandon and Nijhout

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Naftali Weinberger
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a recent paper, Brandon and Nijhout argue against genic selectionism—the thesis, roughly, that evolutionary processes are best understood from the gene's-eye point of view—by presenting a case in which genic models of selection allegedly make predictions that conflict with the (correct) predictions of higher-level genotypic selection models. Their argument, if successful, would refute the widely held belief that genic models and higher-level models are predictively equivalent. Here, I argue that Brandon and Nijhout fail to demonstrate that the models make incompatible predictions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 225 - 237
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.)

Footnotes

‡

I would like to thank Elliott Sober for reading previous versions of this article and for his tremendously helpful feedback. I would also like to thank the following people for reading and commenting on earlier drafts: Robert Brandon, Hayley Clatterbuck, James Crow, Joshua Filler, Michael Goldsby, Casey Helgeson, Naomi Weinberger, and three anonymous referees. Finally, I am very grateful to Bengt C. Autzen, for pointing me in the right direction for developing a corrected genic model, and to William Austin Casey, for his help with the minority advantage fitness function.

References

Brandon, Robert N., and Nijhout, H. Frederik. 2006. “The Empirical Nonequivalence of Genic and Genotypic Models of Selection: A (Decisive) Refutation of Genic Selectionism and Pluralistic Gene Selectionism.” Philosophy of Science 73:277–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1976. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Denniston, Carter, and Crow, James F.. 1990. “Alternative Fitness Models with the Same Allele Frequency Dynamics.” Genetics 125 (May): 201–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerr, B., and Godfrey-Smith, P.. 2002. “Individualist and Multi-level Perspectives on Selection in Structured Populations.” Biology and Philosophy 17:477–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, Richard. 1970. “The Units of Selection.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShea, D. M., and Brandon, R. N.. 2010. Biology's First Law: The Tendency for Diversity and Complexity to Increase in Evolutionary Systems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okasha, Samir. 2006. Evolution and the Levels of Selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roughgarden, J. 1979. Theory of Population Genetics and Evolutionary Ecology: An Introduction. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott, and Lewontin, Richard. 1982. “Artifact, Cause, and Genic Selection.” Philosophy of Science 49:157–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, Elliott, and Wilson, David Sloan. 1994. “A Critical Review of Philosophical Work on the Units of Selection Problem.” Philosophy of Science 61 (4): 534–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, and Kitcher, Phillip. 1988. “The Return of the Gene.” Journal of Philosophy 85:339–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahata, Naoyuki, and Nei, Masatoshi. 1990. “Allelic Genealogy under Overdominant and Frequency-Dependent Selection and Polymorphism of Major Histocompatibility Complex Loci.” Genetics 124 (April): 967–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waters, K. 1991. “Tempered Realism about the Force of Selection.” Philosophy of Science 58:553–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, George C. 1966. Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. C. 1980. “Reductionist Research Strategies and Their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy.” In Scientific Discovery: Case Studies, ed. Nickles, T., 213–59. Vol. 60. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar