Phil. 5350/6350/7350

 

Question Set 2:

Below are topic suggestions for papers.  You may also choose your own topic, though you should clear it with one or both instructors first.  Papers should be 3-5 pages in length and are due Thursday 25 March unless special arrangements have been made in advance.

 

1. Sober argues, ÒWhether genes matter more than environment depends on

features of the world external to JaneÕs own environment and genes.Ó

Explain and describe what you take Sober to mean by this statement in

your own words.  How and why does he arrive at this conclusion?  Do you

think that his reasoning in support of this conclusion is sensible?  Why

or why not?

 

2. Lewontin argues that the analysis of variance is not the analysis of

causes.  Sesardic, in contrast, argues  (1993, see especially pp.

402-406) that we can and should make causal inferences on the basis of

ANOVA.  He writes, Òit is an exaggeration to view any extrapolation here

as being always as good (or bad) as any other.Ó  And, generalization

from a single ANOVA is Òrisky but not in principle illegitimate.Ó

Compare and contrast Lewontin and Sesardic on the question of whether

making causal inferences on the basis of ANOVA is problematic.  Explain

and describe the rationales they offer for their views.  Finally,

explain which views you find most persuasive and why.

 

3. Sesardic argues that heritability estimates are not infallible, but

high heritability is a good ÒsignalÓ indicating that one should look

further (for genetic causes of traits).  Compare and contrast SesardicÕs

view on this subject with the views endorsed by Block.  Why does Block

say that the case of IQ is one where heritability is perhaps not the

best measure of genetic influence?

 

4.  Sterelny, Griffiths, and Dupre all suggest that we ask incompatible

things of a species concept, and so we are unlikely to find a single

concept that can do this job.  Explain what this means and why they think

it.  Then assess whether they are correct.

 

5.  One putative advantage of phenetic species concepts is that they (like

the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of the American Psychiatric

Association) are "theory neutral."  That is, categories judgments based on

similarity judgments can remain constant through changing views of

population circumstances or reproductive history.  Dupre explains why

phenetic species concepts have been widely rejected, but goes on to call

for a 'semantic monism' that can serve as a 'lingua franca' for various

groups, through processes of theory change.  Explain pheneticism and why

(according to Sterelny, Griffiths, and Dupre) it has been rejected.  Then,

explain Dupre's proposal.  Does it differ from pheneticism?  If so, how

so?  Does it escape the problems of pheneticism?

 

6.  Boyd's account of species (and of natural kinds more general) diverges

from the 'orthodoxy' of considering species to be individual populations.

Rather, Boyd holds that species are members of 'property cluster kinds'.

Explain how Boyd's view differs from pheneticism, and assess its prospects

as a theory of species, in light of the species concepts reviewed by

Sterelny, Griffiths, and Dupre.

 

7.  Millikan holds that historical kinds provide a basis for induction

only on the grounds that we have reason to believe that there are common

causes operating.  This suggests that the 'divergence' between various

uses of the species concept suggested in Sterelny and Griffiths's, and

Dupre's works might be unified.  Can they?