Robert N Brandon
Biographic Data
| ID | 5968838 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Robert N Brandon |
| GIVEN NAMES | Robert N |
| FAMILY NAME | Brandon |
| SIGNATURE | BRANDON R N |
| AFFILIATIONS | Duke University |
| ORCID | 0009-0003-7168-1237 |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 16 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 103 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 16 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1978 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2020 |
| H-INDEX | 5 |
The Missing Two-Thirds of Evolutionary Theory
In this Element, we extend our earlier treatment of biology's first law. The law says that in any evolutionary system in which there is variation and heredity, there is a tendency for diversity and complexity to increase. The law plays the same role in biology that Newton's first law plays in physics, explaining what biological systems are expected to do when no forces act, in other words, what happens when nothing happens. Here we offer a deeper…
Adaptation and Environment
By focusing on the crucial role of environment in the process of adaptation, Robert Brandon clarifies definitions and principles so as to help make the argument of evolution by natural selection empirically testable. He proposes that natural selection is the process of differential reproduction resulting from differential adaptedness to a common selective environment.Originally published in 1990.The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-…
Why flying dogs are rare
A Non-Newtonian Newtonian Model of Evolution
Recently philosophers of biology have argued over whether or not Newtonian mechanics provides a useful analogy for thinking about evolutionary theory. For philosophers, the canonical presentation of this analogy is Sober's. Matthen and Ariew and Walsh, Lewins, and Ariew argue that this analogy is deeply wrong-headed. Here I argue that the analogy is indeed useful, however, not in the way it is usually interpreted. The Newtonian analogy depends on…
The Empirical Nonequivalence of Genic and Genotypic Models of Selection
Genic selectionists (Williams 1966; Dawkins 1976) defend the view that genes are the (unique) units of selection and that all evolutionary events can be adequately represented at the genic level. Pluralistic genic selectionists (Sterelny and Kitcher 1988; Waters 1991; Dawkins 1982) defend the weaker view that in many cases there are multiple equally adequate accounts of evolutionary events, but that always among the set of equally adequate repres…
Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology
Does Biology Have Laws? The Experimental Evidence
In this paper I argue that we can best make sense of the practice of experimental evolutionary biology if we see it as investigating contingent , rather than lawlike, regularities. This understanding is contrasted with the experimental practice of certain areas of physics. However, this presents a problem for those who accept the Logical Positivist conception of law and its essential role in scientific explanation. I address this problem by argui…
The Indeterministic Character of Evolutionary Theory
In this paper we first briefly review Bell's (1964, 1966) Theorem to see how it invalidates any deterministic “hidden variable” account of the apparent indeterminacy of quantum mechanics (QM). Then we show that quantum uncertainty, at the level of DNA mutations, can “percolate” up to have major populational effects. Interesting as this point may be it does not show any autonomous indeterminism of the evolutionary process. In the next two sections…
Theory and experiment in evolutionary biology
Sober on Brandon on Screening-Off and the Levels of Selection
Sober (1992) has recently evaluated Brandon's (1982, 1990; see also 1985, 1988) use of Salmon's (1971) concept of screening-off in the philosophy of biology. He critiques three particular issues, each of which will be considered in this discussion
A Simple Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection
Kary (1990) defends the view that evolution by natural selection can be adequately explained in terms of a theory incorporating only a single level of selection. Here I point out some of the inherent inadequacies of such a theory
The Nature of Selection
Nature of presents a powerful analysis of the evolutionary concepts of natural selection, fitness, and adaptation. The book clarifies controversial issues concerning altruism, group selection, and the idea that organisms are survival machines built for the good of the genes that inhabit them. As the book unfolds, it provides a straightforward and self-contained introduction to philosophical and biological problems in evolutionary theory.In the fi…
The Propensity Interpretation of ‘Fitness‘—No Interpretation is No Substitute
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content
Biological teleology
Adaptation and evolutionary theory
Evolution’
These days ‘evolution’ is usually defined as any change in the relative frequencies of genes in a population over time. This definition and some obvious alternatives are examined and rejected. The criticism of these definitions points out the need for a more holistic analysis of genotypes. I attempt such analysis by introducing measures of similarity of whole genotypes and then by grouping genotypes into similarity classes. Three sorts of measure…
Adaptation and evolutionary theory
The Indeterministic Character of Evolutionary Theory
In this paper we first briefly review Bell's (1964, 1966) Theorem to see how it invalidates any deterministic “hidden variable” account of the apparent indeterminacy of quantum mechanics (QM). Then we show that quantum uncertainty, at the level of DNA mutations, can “percolate” up to have major populational effects. Interesting as this point may be it does not show any autonomous indeterminism of the evolutionary process. In the next two sections…
Does Biology Have Laws? The Experimental Evidence
In this paper I argue that we can best make sense of the practice of experimental evolutionary biology if we see it as investigating contingent , rather than lawlike, regularities. This understanding is contrasted with the experimental practice of certain areas of physics. However, this presents a problem for those who accept the Logical Positivist conception of law and its essential role in scientific explanation. I address this problem by argui…
Biological teleology
The Propensity Interpretation of ‘Fitness‘—No Interpretation is No Substitute
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content
Theory and experiment in evolutionary biology
The Empirical Nonequivalence of Genic and Genotypic Models of Selection
Genic selectionists (Williams 1966; Dawkins 1976) defend the view that genes are the (unique) units of selection and that all evolutionary events can be adequately represented at the genic level. Pluralistic genic selectionists (Sterelny and Kitcher 1988; Waters 1991; Dawkins 1982) defend the weaker view that in many cases there are multiple equally adequate accounts of evolutionary events, but that always among the set of equally adequate repres…
Evolution’
These days ‘evolution’ is usually defined as any change in the relative frequencies of genes in a population over time. This definition and some obvious alternatives are examined and rejected. The criticism of these definitions points out the need for a more holistic analysis of genotypes. I attempt such analysis by introducing measures of similarity of whole genotypes and then by grouping genotypes into similarity classes. Three sorts of measure…
A Non-Newtonian Newtonian Model of Evolution
Recently philosophers of biology have argued over whether or not Newtonian mechanics provides a useful analogy for thinking about evolutionary theory. For philosophers, the canonical presentation of this analogy is Sober's. Matthen and Ariew and Walsh, Lewins, and Ariew argue that this analogy is deeply wrong-headed. Here I argue that the analogy is indeed useful, however, not in the way it is usually interpreted. The Newtonian analogy depends on…
Why flying dogs are rare
Sober on Brandon on Screening-Off and the Levels of Selection
Sober (1992) has recently evaluated Brandon's (1982, 1990; see also 1985, 1988) use of Salmon's (1971) concept of screening-off in the philosophy of biology. He critiques three particular issues, each of which will be considered in this discussion
Adaptation and evolutionary theory
Evolution’
These days ‘evolution’ is usually defined as any change in the relative frequencies of genes in a population over time. This definition and some obvious alternatives are examined and rejected. The criticism of these definitions points out the need for a more holistic analysis of genotypes. I attempt such analysis by introducing measures of similarity of whole genotypes and then by grouping genotypes into similarity classes. Three sorts of measure…
Biological teleology
The Propensity Interpretation of ‘Fitness‘—No Interpretation is No Substitute
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content
The Nature of Selection
Nature of presents a powerful analysis of the evolutionary concepts of natural selection, fitness, and adaptation. The book clarifies controversial issues concerning altruism, group selection, and the idea that organisms are survival machines built for the good of the genes that inhabit them. As the book unfolds, it provides a straightforward and self-contained introduction to philosophical and biological problems in evolutionary theory.In the fi…
A Simple Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection
Kary (1990) defends the view that evolution by natural selection can be adequately explained in terms of a theory incorporating only a single level of selection. Here I point out some of the inherent inadequacies of such a theory
Theory and experiment in evolutionary biology
Sober on Brandon on Screening-Off and the Levels of Selection
Sober (1992) has recently evaluated Brandon's (1982, 1990; see also 1985, 1988) use of Salmon's (1971) concept of screening-off in the philosophy of biology. He critiques three particular issues, each of which will be considered in this discussion
The Indeterministic Character of Evolutionary Theory
In this paper we first briefly review Bell's (1964, 1966) Theorem to see how it invalidates any deterministic “hidden variable” account of the apparent indeterminacy of quantum mechanics (QM). Then we show that quantum uncertainty, at the level of DNA mutations, can “percolate” up to have major populational effects. Interesting as this point may be it does not show any autonomous indeterminism of the evolutionary process. In the next two sections…
Does Biology Have Laws? The Experimental Evidence
In this paper I argue that we can best make sense of the practice of experimental evolutionary biology if we see it as investigating contingent , rather than lawlike, regularities. This understanding is contrasted with the experimental practice of certain areas of physics. However, this presents a problem for those who accept the Logical Positivist conception of law and its essential role in scientific explanation. I address this problem by argui…
Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology
The Empirical Nonequivalence of Genic and Genotypic Models of Selection
Genic selectionists (Williams 1966; Dawkins 1976) defend the view that genes are the (unique) units of selection and that all evolutionary events can be adequately represented at the genic level. Pluralistic genic selectionists (Sterelny and Kitcher 1988; Waters 1991; Dawkins 1982) defend the weaker view that in many cases there are multiple equally adequate accounts of evolutionary events, but that always among the set of equally adequate repres…
A Non-Newtonian Newtonian Model of Evolution
Recently philosophers of biology have argued over whether or not Newtonian mechanics provides a useful analogy for thinking about evolutionary theory. For philosophers, the canonical presentation of this analogy is Sober's. Matthen and Ariew and Walsh, Lewins, and Ariew argue that this analogy is deeply wrong-headed. Here I argue that the analogy is indeed useful, however, not in the way it is usually interpreted. The Newtonian analogy depends on…
Adaptation and Environment
By focusing on the crucial role of environment in the process of adaptation, Robert Brandon clarifies definitions and principles so as to help make the argument of evolution by natural selection empirically testable. He proposes that natural selection is the process of differential reproduction resulting from differential adaptedness to a common selective environment.Originally published in 1990.The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-…
Why flying dogs are rare
The Missing Two-Thirds of Evolutionary Theory
In this Element, we extend our earlier treatment of biology's first law. The law says that in any evolutionary system in which there is variation and heredity, there is a tendency for diversity and complexity to increase. The law plays the same role in biology that Newton's first law plays in physics, explaining what biological systems are expected to do when no forces act, in other words, what happens when nothing happens. Here we offer a deeper…
Epistemology (13 works) · Philosophy (13 works) · Evolution and Genetic Dynamics (11 works) · Philosophy and History of Science (10 works) · Computer Science (9 works) · Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation (9 works) · Biology (8 works) · Artificial Intelligence (7 works) · Artificial Intelligence (6 works) · Psychology (6 works)