On fitness

Biology and Philosophy 19 (2):185-203 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The concept of fitness, central to population genetics and to the synthetic theory of evolution, is discussed. After a historical introduction on the origin of this concept, the current meaning of it in population genetics is examined: a cause of the selective process and its quantification. Several difficulties arise for its exact definition. Three adequacy criteria for such a definition are formulated. It is shown that it is impossible to formulate an adequate definition of fitness respecting these criteria. The propensity definition of fitness is presented and rejected. Finally it is argued that fitness is a conceptual device, a useful tool, only for descriptive purposes of selective processes, changing from case to case, and thus devoid of any substantial physical counterpart. Any attempt to its reification is an apport to the metaphysical load evolutionary theory has inherited from Natural Theology.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

The propensity interpretation of fitness.Susan K. Mills & John H. Beatty - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (2):263-286.
New Ways to Look at Fitness.Wim J. Van der Steen - 1994 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 16 (3):479 - 492.
Fitness as a Function.Henry Byerly - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:494-501.
Fitness as primitive and propensity.Alexander Rosenberg & Mary Williams - 1986 - Philosophy of Science 53 (3):412-418.
The confusions of fitness.AndrÉ Ariew - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):347-363.
A causal dispositional account of fitness.Laura Nuño de la Rosa & Vanessa Triviño - 2016 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 38 (3):1-18.
Block Fitness.Grant Ramsey - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 37 (3):484-498.
Can fitness differences be a cause of evolution?Grant Ramsey - 2013 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 5 (20130604):1-13.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
194 (#208,207)

6 months
31 (#286,053)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A New Foundation for the Propensity Interpretation of Fitness.Charles H. Pence & Grant Ramsey - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):851-881.
How Do Natural Selection and Random Drift Interact?Marshall Abrams - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5):666-679.
Levels, Time and Fitness in Evolutionary Transitions in Individuality.Pierrick Bourrat - 2015 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 7 (20150505).

View all 22 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The spandrels of San Marco and the panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme.Stephen Jay Gould - 1979 - Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences 205.
The propensity interpretation of fitness.Susan K. Mills & John H. Beatty - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (2):263-286.
Adaptation and Evolutionary Theory.Robert N. Brandon - 1978 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 9 (3):181.
The Theory of Island Biogeography.Robert H. Macarthur & Edward O. Wilson - 2002 - Journal of the History of Biology 35 (1):178-179.

View all 10 references / Add more references