Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T21:16:09.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Matter of Individuality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

David L. Hull
David L. Hull*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biological species have been treated traditionally as spatiotemporally unrestricted classes. If they are to perform the function which they do in the evolutionary process, they must be spatiotemporally localized individuals, historical entities. Reinterpreting biological species as historical entities solves several important anomalies in biology, in philosophy of biology, and within philosophy itself. It also has important implications for any attempt to present an “evolutionary” analysis of science and for sciences such as anthropology which are devoted to the study of single species.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , September 1978 , pp. 335 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1978

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

†

The research for this paper was supported by NSF grant Soc 75 03535. I am indebted to the following people for reading and criticizing early versions of this paper: Michael Ghiselin, Stephen Gould, G. C. D. Griffiths, John Koethe, Ernst Mayr, Bella Selan, W. J. van der Steen, Gareth Nelson, Michael Perloff, Mark Ridley, Michael Ruse, Thomas Schopf, Paul Teller, Leigh Van Valen, Linda Wessels, Mary Williams, and William Wimsatt. Their advice and criticisms are much appreciated.

References

[1] Bitterman, M. E. “The Comparative Analysis of Learning.” Science. 188(1975): 699–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Boyden, A. “The Significance of Asexual Reproduction.” Systematic Zoology. 3(1954): 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Buck, R. C., and Hull, D. L. “The Logical Structure of the Linnaean Hierarchy.” Systematic Zoology. 15(1966): 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Burian, R. M. “More than a Marriage of Convenience: On the Inextricability of History and Philosophy of Science.” Philosophy of Science. 44(1977): 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Crowson, R. A. Classification and Biology. New York: Atherton Press, 1970.Google Scholar
[6] Davis, P. H., and Heywood, V. H. Principles of Angiosperm Taxonomy. Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1963.Google Scholar
[7] Darwin, C. On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
[8] Dawkins, R. The Selfish Gene. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
[9] Dobzhansky, T. “Mendelian Populations and their Evolution.” In L. C. Dunn (ed.) Genetics in the 20th Century. New York: Macmillan, 1951. pp. 573–589.Google Scholar
[10] Ehrlich, P. R., and Raven, P. H. “Differentiation of Populations.” Science 165(1969): 1228–1231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[11] Eldredge, N., and Gould, S. J. “Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism.” In T. J. M. Schopf (ed.) Models in Paleobiology. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper and Company, pp. 82–115.Google Scholar
[12] Ghiselin, M. T. “On Psychologism in the Logic of Taxonomic Controversies.” Systematic Zoology. 15(1966): 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Ghiselin, M. T. The Triumph of the Darwinian Method. Berkeley and London: University of California Press, 1969.Google Scholar
[14] Ghiselin, M. T. “A Radical Solution to the Species Problem.” Systematic Zoology. 23(1974): 536–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Griffiths, G. C. D. “On the Foundations of Biological Systematics.” Acta Biotheoretica. 23(1974): 85–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Heise, H., and Starr, M. P. “Nomenifers: Are They Christened or Classified?” Systematic Zoology. 17(1968): 458–467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[17] Hennig, W. Phylogenetic Systematics. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1966.Google Scholar
[18] Hull, D. L. “The Effect of Essentialism on Taxonomy.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 15(1965): 314–326; 16(1966): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19] Hull, D. L. “The Conflict between Spontaneous Generation and Aristotle's Metaphysics.” Proceedings of the Seventh Inter-American Congress of Philosophy. Québec City: Les Presses de l'Université Laval. 2(1968): 245–250.Google Scholar
[20] Hull, D. L. Philosophy of Biological Science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1974.Google Scholar
[21] Hull, D. L. “Central Subjects and Historical Narratives.” History and Theory. 14(1975): 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22] Hull, D. L. “Are Species Really Individuals?” Systematic Zoology. 25(1976): 174–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23] Hull, D. L. “The Ontological Status of Biological Species.” In R. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds.) Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 32. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1976. pp. 347–358.Google Scholar
[24] Huxley, T. H. “Biology.” Encyclopedia Britannica (1889).Google Scholar
[25] Janzen, Daniel, “What Are Dandelions and Aphids?” American Naturalist. 111(1977): 586–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26] Kripke, S. S. “Naming and Necessity.” In D. Davidson and H. Harman (eds.) Semantics and Natural Language. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel, 1972. pp. 253–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[27] Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed., 1969.Google Scholar
[28] Kuhn, T. S. “Second Thoughts on Paradigms.” In F. Suppe (ed.) The Structure of Scientific Theory. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1974.Google Scholar
[29] Laudan, L. Progress and Its Problems. Berkeley and London: University of California Press, 1977.Google Scholar
[30] Levins, R. Evolution in Changing Environments. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[31] Lewontin, R. C. “Evolution and the Theory of Games.” Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1(1961): 382–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[32] Lewontin, R. C. “The Units of Selection.” The Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1(1970): 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[33] Lewontin, R. C. The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
[34] Löther, R. Die Beherrschung der Mannigfaltigkeit. Jena: Gustav Fischer, 1972.Google Scholar
[35] Mayr, E. (ed.) The Species Problem. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science Publication Number 50, 1957.Google Scholar
[36] Mayr, E. “Isolation as an Evolutionary Factor.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 103(1959): 221–230.Google Scholar
[37] Mayr, E. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[38] Mayr, E. “Is the Species a Class or an Individual?” Systematic Zoology. 25(1976): 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[39] Mayr, E., Linsley, E. G. and Usinger, R. L. Methods and Principles of Systematic Zoology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1953.Google Scholar
[40] Meglitsch, P. A. “On the Nature of Species.” Systematic Zoology. 3(1954): 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[41] Mettler, L. E., and Gregg, T. G. Population Genetics and Evolution. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1969.Google Scholar
[42] Monod, J. L. “On the Molecular Theory of Evolution.” In R. Harré (ed.) Problems of Scientific Revolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975. pp. 11–24.Google Scholar
[43] Munson, R. “Is Biology a Provincial Science?” Philosophy of Science. 42(1975): 428–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[44] Odum, E. P. “The Emergence of Ecology as a New Integrative Discipline.” Science. 195(1977): 1289–1293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[45] Popper, K. R. Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[46] Popper, K. R. “The Rationality of Scientific Revolutions.” In R. Harré (ed.) Problems of Scientific Revolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975. pp. 72–101.Google Scholar
[47] Putnam, H. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning.‘” In K. Gunderson (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vii. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1974. pp. 131–193.Google Scholar
[48] Ruse, M. J. The Philosophy of Biology. London: Hutchinson University Library, 1973.Google Scholar
[49] Schopf, J. M. “Emphasis on Holotype.” Science. 131(1960): 1043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[50] Simpson, G.G. “The Principles of Classification and a Classification of Mammals.” Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 85, 1945. pp. 1–350.Google Scholar
[51] Simpson, G. G. Principles of Animal Taxonomy. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[52] Smart, J. J. C. Philosophy and Scientific Realism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.Google Scholar
[53] Smart, J. J. C. Between Science and Philosophy. New York: Random House, 1968.Google Scholar
[54] Sneath, P. H. A. and Sokal, R. R. Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1973.Google Scholar
[55] Thorndike, E. L. Animal Intelligence. New York: Macmillan, 1911.Google Scholar
[56] Toulmin, S. Human Understanding. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[57] Van Fraassen, Bas. “Probabilities and the Problem of Individuation.” In S. A. Luckenbach (ed.) Probabilities, Problems and Paradoxes. Encino, Cal.: Dickinson Publishing Co., 1972. pp. 121–138.Google Scholar
[58] Vendler, Z. “On the Possibility of Possible Worlds.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 5(1976): 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[59] Wade, M. J. “A Critical Review of the Models of Group Selection.” Quarterly Review of Biology. 1978, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[60] Wiley, E. O. “The Evolutionary Species Concept Reconsidered.” Systematic Zoology, forthcoming.Google Scholar
[61] Williams, G. C. Adaption and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
[62] Wilson, E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
[63] Wynne-Edwards, V. C. Animal Dispersion in Relation to Social Behaviour. Edinburgh & London: Oliver & Boyd, 1962.Google Scholar
[64] Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan, 1953.Google Scholar