Modus Darwin Reconsidered

ABSTRACT ‘Modus Darwin’ is the name given by Elliott Sober to a form of argument that he attributes to Darwin in the Origin of Species, and to subsequent evolutionary biologists who have reasoned in the same way. In short, the argument form goes: similarity, ergo common ancestry. In this article, I...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The British journal for the philosophy of science 2018-03, Vol.69 (1), p.193-213
Main Author: Helgeson, Casey
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:ABSTRACT ‘Modus Darwin’ is the name given by Elliott Sober to a form of argument that he attributes to Darwin in the Origin of Species, and to subsequent evolutionary biologists who have reasoned in the same way. In short, the argument form goes: similarity, ergo common ancestry. In this article, I review and critique Sober’s analysis of Darwin’s reasoning. I argue that modus Darwin has serious limitations that make the argument form unsuitable for supporting Darwin’s conclusions, and that Darwin did not reason in this way. 1 Introduction2 Modus Darwin3 Limitations of Sober’s Formal Framework 3.1 Anatomical space3.2 Branch lengths4 Did Darwin Use Modus Darwin? 4.1 Adaptive characters4.2 Galapagos5 Modus Darwin versus Phylogenetic Inference6 Conclusion
ISSN:0007-0882
1464-3537
DOI:10.1093/bjps/axw015