Similarities as Evidence for Common Ancestry
A Likelihood Epistemology
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8397200 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Elliott Sober (0000-0003-3130-1263, University of Wisconsin–Madison), Mike Steel (0000-0001-7015-4644, University of Canterbury) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 617-638 |
| Publication date | 2017-09-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0882 • E-ISSN: 1464-3537 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/bjps/axv052 |
| OpenAlex | W1870867423 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 15 |
Darwin claims in the Origin that similarity is evidence for common ancestry, but that adaptive similarities are ‘almost valueless’ as evidence. This second claim seems reasonable for some adaptive similarities but not for others. Here we clarify and evaluate these and related matters by using the law of likelihood as an analytic tool and by considering mathematical models of three evolutionary processes: directional selection, stabilizing selection, and drift. Our results apply both to Darwin’s theory of evolution and to modern evolutionary biology. 1 Introduction2 The Likelihood Framework3 A Sufficient Condition for a Similarity to Favour Common Ancestry over Separate Ancestry4 The 1/p Criterion and Its Limitations5 Directional Selection versus Drift6 Stabilizing Selection versus Drift7 Going beyond Two Taxa8 ConclusionsAppendix
Biology · Darwin (ADL) · Epistemology · Evolutionary biology · Genealogy · Mathematical economics · Maximum likelihood · Selection (genetic algorithm) · Similarity (geometry) · Statistics · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Evolution and Genetic Dynamics · Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation · History · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2024 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |