Philosophy of Biology

Traits, Genes, and Coding 397

for. The discrepancy here indicates that the appeal to selection falls short of the
explanatory mark, since it would surely be uncomfortable to be forced to conclude
that the white-coat-related element codes for a white coat, whereas the blue-eyes-
related element codes only for proteins. And thinking of the blue-eyes-related gene
as being indirectly selected for certainly won’t help, since the explanation for its
presence is that having a thick coat is selectively advantageous in the environment
in question; so that would make the content of the blue-eyes-related gene ‘build a
thick coat’ which is surely not what we want.
Although there is undoubtedly more to be said on the reach of the code, the
foregoing discussion indicates that it is a difficult and challenging issue. In view of
the problems in extending that reach beyond proteins to traits, the default option
ought to be to restrict it to proteins. Add this to the conclusion that the locus of
coding talk in biological development is mRNA, the base triplets that determine
the strings of amino acids constructed during protein synthesis, and the following
picture emerges. The power of coding talk in development may be limited at both
ends. Such talk doesn’t stretch as far back as genes, and it may not stretch as far
forward as phenotypic traits.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For important critical discussion of the ideas presented here, my thanks go to
Andre Ariew, Andy Clark, Sharon Groves, Katie Kendig, Phyllis McKay, Matteo
Mameli, Mohan Matthen, John Maynard Smith, Alan Millar, Marion Rosowski,
Nicholas Shea, Eliott Sober, Ulrich Stegmann, Peter Sullivan, Terry Sullivan, Denis
Walsh, and my 2005Foundations of EvolutionMasters class at the University of
Edinburgh.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[Bullock, 1998] S. Bullock. The emptiness of the self-contained coder: Commentary on an ex-

tract from ‘Twisted Tales’ by A. Clark.Connexions, 3: 7–9, 1998.

[Cummins, 1975]R. Cummins. Functional analysis.Journal of Philosophy, 72: 741–765, 1975.

[DeLisi, 1988]C. DeLisi. The human Genome Project.American Scientist, 76: 488–93, 1988.

[Dretske, 1981] F. Dretske.Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Cambridge MA: MIT Press,

1981.

[Dupre, 2005] J. Dupre. Are there genes? In A. O’Hear (ed.),Philosophy, Biology and Life.

Supplement toPhilosophy, 56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pages 193–210, 2005.

[Godfrey-Smith, 2000a] P. Godfrey-Smith. Information, arbitrariness, and selection: Comments

on Maynard Smith.Philosophy of Science, 67: 202–207, 2000.

[Godfrey-Smith, 2000b]P. Godfrey-Smith. On the theoretical role of genetic coding.Philosophy

of Science, 67: 26–44, 2000.

[Goodwin, 1994]B. Goodwin.How the Leopard Changed its Spots: the Evolution of Complexity.

London: Phoenix, 1994.

[Griffiths, 2001]P. E. Griffiths. Genetic information: A metaphor in search of a theory.Philos-

ophy of Science, 68: 394–412, 2001.

[Griffiths, 2005]P. E. Griffiths. Function, homology and character individuation. Paper pre-

sented at ‘The concept of function in biology and language’, Universit ́a di Catania, May 2005.