xii Preface
Thingshavechanged.Thereisnowaclearlydefineddialecticandmanymore
scholarswhocontributetoit. Nonetheless,becausethefieldissoyoung,itis
difficulttodefineproblemareasanddialecticsthatwillbe validtwentyyears
fromnow—andthisiswhatwetookourjobtobeaseditorsofthisvolume.
Broadlyspeaking,therearetwokindsofinquirythatwewantedtoinclude:first,
theconceptualinvestigationofbiologicalproblems,andsecond,the waysthat
biologyhasbeenasourceofilluminationforproblemsoutsideofthephilosophy
ofbiologyitself.Itisperhapsinthesecondareathatthe“newbiology”hasmost
significance. Physicsisnevergoingtothrowmuchlightonhumannature,or
thenatureofcognition,orofsociety,andsophilosophersofphysicsdonothave
toconcernthemselveswiththesethings. Butbiologyclearlyintrudesintothese
areasofinquiry,legitimatelyornot,anditisthetaskofscientificallywell-informed
philosophersandphilosophicallymindedscientiststoprobe,monitor,police,and
regulatethesestudies. Ontheotherhand,theilluminationisreciprocal: the
applicationsofbiologytendtoconfirmordisconfirmtheambitionsandpretensions
ofbiologicalspeculations. Forthesereasons,thephilosophyofbiologyismuch
broaderthanbiologyitself.Itisconcernedwithconceptualanalysis,butwithan
eyetoabroadrangeofissues.
EvolutionoccupiesagreatdealofthisHandbook.Inthepartexplicitlydevoted
tothetopic,ChristopherStephensdealswithbroadissuesofexplanationand
confirmationinthetheoryofnaturalselection,AnyaPlutynskiwithneutralism
(i.e.,evolutioninwhichtheintensityofselectionisrelativelymuted),RobertA.
Wilsonwiththeunitsofselectiondebate,andKimSterelnywiththerelatively
newtopicofevolvability. ThispartoftheHandbookconcludeswithtwoessays,
byMichaelBradyandCatherineWilson,onnormsthatariseoutofevolution.
Evolutionisalsocrucialtothediscussionofotherareasofbiology-suchasthe
natureofdevelopment,dealtwithbyDenisWalshinPartI,andtaxonomy,dealt
withbyMarcEreshefskyinPartIV,aswellasthecloselyrelatedissueofrace,
whichisthetopicofRobinO.Andreason’sentryinPartIV.Inevolutionarytheory,
therehasbeenarecrudescence,inrecentyears,ofDarwin’sessentiallyhistorical
approachtoexplainingtheoriginofspecies—whichforawhilewasneglectedin
favourofstudiesofadaptationandoptimization(seeA.W.F.Edwards’entry)
inthemiddlepartofthelastcentury. PartIVexploresthisinthecontextof
taxonomy,whereinadditiontotheessaysbyEreshefskyandAndreason,Brian
Hallprovidesanintroductiontothefoundationsofthishistoricalapproachinhis
entryonHomologyandHomoplasy.
Thenthereisgenetics.InPartIII,RafiFalktracestheemergenceanddevel-
opmentofthegene-conceptinhisentry“GeneticAnalysis”.MargaretMorrison
there were the vitalists, the mysterians, the Bergsonians. But there was
nothing like a discipline, no agreed upon central issues or standards or reading
were in the seventies: a thousand flowers bloomed, but it was impossible , or at the
very least dangerous, to try it on in graduate school.
Donald Campbell are scholars from whom we can all still learn. Further afield,
lists. And no paths were recognized as dangerous to traverse. That was how things