The Structure and Strategy of Darwin's ‘Long Argument’

Hodge, M. J. S.

doi:10.1017/s0007087400015685

Cited by 89 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(19), he starts with artificial selection; this is a context in which selection has been observed. From this he extrapolates to natural selection, where selection must usually be inferred, and argues that selection is competent to produce the traits we now observe in nature and that it has actually done so (20)(21)(22). Darwin could have begun with common ancestry and still pursued this Herschelian strategy.…”

Section: Exceptions To Darwin's Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Did Darwin write theOriginbackwards?

Sober¹

2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After clarifying how Darwin understood natural selection and common ancestry, I consider how the two concepts are related in his theory. I argue that common ancestry has evidential priority. Arguments about natural selection often make use of the assumption of common ancestry, whereas arguments for common ancestry do not require the assumption that natural selection has been at work. In fact, Darwin held that the key evidence for common ancestry comes from characters whose evolution is not caused by natural selection. This raises the question of why Darwin puts natural selection first and foremost in the Origin.What is Darwin's Theory?T o characterize Darwin's theory, what could be more natural than to cite the title that Darwin gave to his own book (1)? How could this formulation lead us astray? In fact, there is trouble here, and it is of Darwin's own making. Although Darwin (ref. 1, p. 1) says that the origin of species is the ''mystery of mysteries'' that he proposes to solve, his solution of the problem is in some ways a dissolution. I say this because Darwin had doubts about the species category; he regarded the difference between species and varieties as arbitrary. When 2 populations split from a common ancestor and diverge from each other under the influence of different selection pressures, they begin as 2 populations from the same variety, then they become 2 varieties of the same species, and finally they reach the point where they count as different species. It is convenience, not fact, that leads us to classify different degrees of divergence in different ways (ref. 1, pp. 48-52). This vague boundary between variety and species is no reason to deny the existence of individual species, nor did Darwin do so (2,36). This is the lesson we learn from other vague concepts -from rich and poor, hairy and bald, tall and short; a vague boundary does not entail that no one is rich, or hairy, or tall. Even so, ''species'' is not the central concept in Darwin's theory. True, the process he describes produces species, but it produces traits and taxa at all levels of organization. For these reasons, Darwin's theory is better described as ''the origin of diversity by means of natural selection.'' Darwin's concept of natural selection has several noteworthy features. Although the Origin introduced the idea of natural selection by first describing artificial selection, Darwin hastened to emphasize that natural selection is not an agent who intentionally chooses. When cold climate causes polar bears to evolve longer fur, the weather is not an intelligent designer who wants polar bears to change. The weather kills some bears while allowing others to survive, but the weather does not need to have a mind to do this. It is in this sense that natural selection is a mindless process (for a different assessment, see ref.3). So concerned was Darwin to emphasize this point that, in the 5th edition of the Origin, he followed Alfred Russel Wallace's advice and used Herbert Spencer's phrase ''the survival of the fittest'' to char...

show abstract

Section: Exceptions To Darwin's Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Did Darwin write theOriginbackwards?

Sober¹

2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lewens connects his suggestion to work by two other scholars. He defends the suggestion by endorsing Hodge's (1977) argument that Darwin was influenced by Herschel's vera causa principle. Hodge argues that Darwin organized the Origin so that it would demonstrate the existence, competence, and responsibility of natural selection for a wide range of observations.…”

Section: Reply To Tim Lewensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Replies to commentators on Did Darwin Write the Origin Backwards?

Sober

2014

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here I reply to Jean Gayon's, Tim Lewens's, and Samir Okasha's comments on Did Darwin write the Origin backwards? The topics addressed include: (1) Darwin's thinking that common ancestry is ''evidentially prior'' to natural selection; (2) how Darwin uses phylogenetic trees to test hypotheses concerning natural selection; (3) how group and indivdiual selection should be defined, and how each is related to the concept of adaptation.

show abstract

“…Jon Hodge has argued that Darwin's case in the Origin is modelled on Herschel's vera causa principle (e.g. Hodge 1977Hodge , 2012. To establish selection as a 'true cause' Herschel tells us that we need to show (paraphrasing somewhat) that it is real, that it can conceivably bring about the effects it is alleged to bring about, and that it is in fact responsible for these effects.…”

Section: Pattern Process and Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Backwards in Retrospect

Lewens

2014

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the title chapter of Did Darwin Write the Origin Backwards?, Sober argues for an asymmetry between facts about genealogy and facts about natural selection, which has the result that evidentially (but not causally) Darwin's book is the wrong way round. Here I make three points about Sober's argument in that chapter. First, it is not clear that Darwin employs what Sober calls 'tree thinking' as frequently as Sober himself suggests. Second, I argue that Darwin's reason for structuring the Origin as he did can be understood if we think of the Origin's argument as an inference to the best explanation. Third, I show circumstances where, even if selection is the only important evolutionary force, we would still be able to infer common ancestry.

show abstract

The Structure and Strategy of Darwin's ‘Long Argument’

Cited by 89 publications

References 1 publication

Did Darwin write theOriginbackwards?

Did Darwin write theOriginbackwards?

Replies to commentators on Did Darwin Write the Origin Backwards?

Backwards in Retrospect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About