The domain relativity of evolutionary contingency

Abstract

A key issue in the philosophy of biology is evolutionary contingency, the degree to which evolutionary outcomes could have been different. Contingency is typically contrasted with evolutionary convergence, where different evolutionary pathways result in the same or similar outcomes. Convergences are given as evidence against the hypothesis that evolutionary outcomes are highly contingent. But the best available treatments of contingency do not, when read closely, produce the desired contrast with convergence. Rather, they produce a picture in which any degree of contingency is compatible with any degree of convergence. This is because convergence is the repeated production of a given outcome from different starting points, and contingency has been defined without reference to the size of the space of possible outcomes. In small spaces of possibilities, the production of repeated outcomes is almost assured. This paper presents a definition of contingency which includes this modal dimension in a way that does not reduce it to the binary notion of contingency found in standard modal logic. The result is a conception of contingency which properly contrasts with convergence, given some domain of possibilities and a measure defined over it. We should therefore not ask whether evolution is contingent or convergent simpliciter, but rather about the degree to which it is contingent or convergent in various domains, as measured in various ways. Key Words: contingency, convergence, evolution, modality Acknowledgments: This paper has been transformed several times over by excellent feedback. I am grateful for comments on a much earlier version from John Beatty and Eric Desjardins. Two quite different versions were presented to meetings of the Consortium for the History and Philosophy of Biology, both of which received helpful commentary and suggestions. Throughout the writing process I have received invaluable feedback from Denis Walsh and Philippe Huneman, as well as reading groups at the IHPST Toronto, and two anonymous reviewers. Author: Cory Travers Lewis

Chance, Evolution, and the Metaphysical Implications of Paleontological Practice

“…Similar concerns exist for contingency (Desjardins 2016;Turner 2011), as well as how best to characterize its evolutionary sources and effects, such as mass extinctions and adaptive radiations (McConwell and Currie 2017;McConwell 2019). In particular, there are good theoretical arguments for taking both contingency and convergence as domain relative in order to sufficiently distinguish them and compare their relative importance (Lewis 2018). Although it would require explicit demonstration, this argument is congruent with the conclusions about character evolution drawn from successful paleontological practice, which are domain relative since the relevant modal profiles are in the empirical analysis.…”

Turtle Shell Kinesis Underscores Constraints and Opportunities in the Evolution of the Vertebrate Musculoskeletal System

“…At the cellular and tissue scale, not much interspecific variation is expected during this process. Instead, it is how the requisite mechanical stimulus is generated, which depends on historical contingency, that is, the ancestral phenotypic parameters of a clade ( Lewis 2018 ) (see ``ancestral ontogeny” in Fig. 8 A).…”

Evolutionary contingency as non-trivial objective probability: Biological evitability and evolutionary trajectories

“…In a recent paper, Lewis (2018) suggests that contingency is weaker or stronger depending on the relative 'volumes' of the set of initial conditions and outcomes. A volume, in Lewis' analysis, refers to the region of phase points in any hyperspace of possibility (e.g.…”

“…a region in a morphospace). According to Lewis (2018), if a small volume of initial conditions leads to a large volume of outcomes, then contingency is said to be strong. This way of cashing out the way in which sensitivity to initial conditions varies in degree differs to that of Ben-Menahem (1997) and Powell (2012).…”