Methodological problems in evolutionary biology V. The import of supervenience

Acta Biotheoretica 35 (3):185-191 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Rosenberg has rightly argued that fitness is supervenient. But he has wrongly assumed that this makes “The fittest survive” nontautologous. Supervenience makes strict reduction impossible. It sheds light on disputes concerning the testability of evolutionary theory

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,010

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-01-31

Downloads
22 (#973,289)

6 months
6 (#861,180)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Biological Science.Alexander Rosenberg - 1985 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The Structure of Biological Science.Alexander Rosenberg - 1987 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (1):119-121.
The Structure of Biological Science.Alexander Rosenberg - 1986 - Journal of the History of Biology 19 (1):161-162.
The supervenience of biological concepts.Alexander Rosenberg - 1978 - Philosophy of Science 45 (3):368-386.

View all 10 references / Add more references