Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The ... more Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The concept became crucial to the understanding of relationships among organisms during the early nineteenth century, and it remains important today. Definitions of homology have changed with the progress of biology, and even today different versions are associated with different research agendas. The differences illustrate philosophical issues about the workings of definition and explanation in science.
An Introductory Essay from the book "Richard Owen: On the nature of limbs: a Discourse&a... more An Introductory Essay from the book "Richard Owen: On the nature of limbs: a Discourse", University of Chicago Press, 2007. The book contains a facsimile reproduction of Owen's 1849 paper along with a preface by Brian K. Hall and Introductory essays by Amundson, Kevin Padian, Mary P. Winsor and Jennifer Coggon.
From Embryology to Evo-Devo . A History of Developmental Evolution. Manfred D. Laubichler and Jan... more From Embryology to Evo-Devo . A History of Developmental Evolution. Manfred D. Laubichler and Jane Maienschein, Eds. . MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007. 577 pp. $55, £33.95. ISBN 9780262122832. Dibner Institute Studies in the History of Science and Technology. The contributors (historians, philosophers, and biologists) explore the status of ontogeny and phylogeny in early 20th-century biology, discuss the roots and current state of evolutionary developmental biology, and consider the interdisciplinary field's future prospects.
Charles Darwin died in 1882. During the twentieth century his reputation varied through time, as ... more Charles Darwin died in 1882. During the twentieth century his reputation varied through time, as the scientific foundation of evolutionary theory changed. Beginning the century as an intellectual hero, he soon became a virtual footnote as experimental approaches to evolution began to develop. As the Modern Synthesis developed his reputation began to rise again until eventually he was identified as a founding father of the Modern Synthesis itself. In the meantime, developmental approaches to evolution began to challenge certain aspects of the Modern Synthesis. Synthesis authors attempted to refute the relevance of development by methodological arguments, some of them indirectly credited to Darwin. By the end of the century, molecular genetics had given new life to development approaches to evolution, now called evo devo. This must be seen as a refutation of the aforesaid methodological arguments of the Modern Synthesis advocates. By the way, we can also see now how the historiography that credited Darwin with the Synthesis was in error. In conclusion, one more historical revision is suggested.
The conventionalist epistemology of cultural anthropology can be seen to be embedded in the metho... more The conventionalist epistemology of cultural anthropology can be seen to be embedded in the methods of ‘cognitive anthropology’, the study of folk conceptual systems. These methods result in indiscriminately depicting all folk systems as conventional, whether or not the systems are intended by the native to represent objective features of the world. Hypothetical and actual ethnographic situations are discussed. It is concluded that the anthropologist's projection of his/her own epistemology onto a native system is ethnocentric. This epistemological prejudice may be peculiar to the cognitive sciences.
is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conc... more is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conclusions from what he takes to be the present state of cognitive science. One shocker was his suggestion that a great many lexical concepts (e.g. "xylophone, " "grandmother") might be innate (1983, p. 279). Another, the topic of Garrett and Graham's paper, is his argument that a naturalistic psychology (NP) is impossible in practice. One may take a variety of stances with respect to these claims. Some regard them as stunning discoveries, others simply as puzzles for cognitive philosophers and psychologists to solve, still others as reductiones ad absurdum of the entire enterprise of cognitive science. Garrett and Graham defend NP. They claim to argue not against Fodor's cognitive "computationalism" but only against his rejection of NP. While I share many of their intuitions regarding criteria for scientific status, Garrett and Graham do not succeed in the task they set for themselves. Their rejection of Fodor's anti-naturalism succeeds only if certain central tenets of Fodor's cognitivism (rationalism, computationalism) are also rejected. In other words, Garrett and Graham belong in the "reductio ad absurdum" camp of Fodor's commentators.
is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conc... more is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conclusions from what he takes to be the present state of cognitive science. One shocker was his suggestion that a great many lexical concepts (e.g. "xylophone, " "grandmother") might be innate (1983, p. 279). Another, the topic of Garrett and Graham's paper, is his argument that a naturalistic psychology (NP) is impossible in practice. One may take a variety of stances with respect to these claims. Some regard them as stunning discoveries, others simply as puzzles for cognitive philosophers and psychologists to solve, still others as reductiones ad absurdum of the entire enterprise of cognitive science. Garrett and Graham defend NP. They claim to argue not against Fodor's cognitive "computationalism" but only against his rejection of NP. While I share many of their intuitions regarding criteria for scientific status, Garrett and Graham do not succeed in the task they set for themselves. Their rejection of Fodor's anti-naturalism succeeds only if certain central tenets of Fodor's cognitivism (rationalism, computationalism) are also rejected. In other words, Garrett and Graham belong in the "reductio ad absurdum" camp of Fodor's commentators.
The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology This document is not a reproduction of t... more The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology This document is not a reproduction of the original published article. It is a facsimile of the text, arranged to have the same pagination as the published version.
During the early part of the 20th century most embryologists were skeptical about the significanc... more During the early part of the 20th century most embryologists were skeptical about the significance of Mendelian genetics to embryological development. A few embryologists began to study the developmental effects of Mendelian genes around 1940. Such work was a necessary step on the path to modern developmental biology. It occurred during the time when the Evolutionary Synthesis was integrating Mendelian and population genetics into a unified evolutionary theory. Why did the first embryological geneticists begin their study at that particular time? One possible explanation is that developmental genetics was a potential avenue of alliance between embryology and evolutionary biology, two fields that had been separated since the 1890s. To assess this possible motive it is necessary to explore the methodological contrasts that obtained between embryology and both Mendelian-chromosomal genetics and neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. Some of these contrasts persist to the present day.
Continuing tensions exist between mainstream bioethics and advocates of the disability rights mov... more Continuing tensions exist between mainstream bioethics and advocates of the disability rights movement. This paper explores some of the grounds for those tensions as exemplified in From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice by Allen Buchanan and coauthors, a book by four prominent bioethicists that is critical of the disability rights movement. One set of factors involves the nature of disability and impairment. A second set involves presumptions regarding social values, including the importance of intelligence in relation to other human characteristics, competition as the basis of social organization, and the nature of the parent-child relationship. The authors' disapproval of certain aspects of the disability rights movement can be seen to be associated with particular positions regarding these factors. Although the authors intend to use a method of 'broad reflective equilibrium,' we argue that their idiosyncratic commitment to particular concepts of disability and particular social values produces a narrowing of the moral significance of their conclusions regarding disability rights.
Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The ... more Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The concept became crucial to the understanding of relationships among organisms during the early nineteenth century, and it remains important today. Definitions of homology have changed with the progress of biology, and even today different versions are associated with different research agendas. The differences illustrate philosophical issues about the workings of definition and explanation in science.
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf ... more Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The ... more Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The concept became crucial to the understanding of relationships among organisms during the early nineteenth century, and it remains important today. Definitions of homology have changed with the progress of biology, and even today different versions are associated with different research agendas. The differences illustrate philosophical issues about the workings of definition and explanation in science.
An Introductory Essay from the book "Richard Owen: On the nature of limbs: a Discourse&a... more An Introductory Essay from the book "Richard Owen: On the nature of limbs: a Discourse", University of Chicago Press, 2007. The book contains a facsimile reproduction of Owen's 1849 paper along with a preface by Brian K. Hall and Introductory essays by Amundson, Kevin Padian, Mary P. Winsor and Jennifer Coggon.
From Embryology to Evo-Devo . A History of Developmental Evolution. Manfred D. Laubichler and Jan... more From Embryology to Evo-Devo . A History of Developmental Evolution. Manfred D. Laubichler and Jane Maienschein, Eds. . MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007. 577 pp. $55, £33.95. ISBN 9780262122832. Dibner Institute Studies in the History of Science and Technology. The contributors (historians, philosophers, and biologists) explore the status of ontogeny and phylogeny in early 20th-century biology, discuss the roots and current state of evolutionary developmental biology, and consider the interdisciplinary field's future prospects.
Charles Darwin died in 1882. During the twentieth century his reputation varied through time, as ... more Charles Darwin died in 1882. During the twentieth century his reputation varied through time, as the scientific foundation of evolutionary theory changed. Beginning the century as an intellectual hero, he soon became a virtual footnote as experimental approaches to evolution began to develop. As the Modern Synthesis developed his reputation began to rise again until eventually he was identified as a founding father of the Modern Synthesis itself. In the meantime, developmental approaches to evolution began to challenge certain aspects of the Modern Synthesis. Synthesis authors attempted to refute the relevance of development by methodological arguments, some of them indirectly credited to Darwin. By the end of the century, molecular genetics had given new life to development approaches to evolution, now called evo devo. This must be seen as a refutation of the aforesaid methodological arguments of the Modern Synthesis advocates. By the way, we can also see now how the historiography that credited Darwin with the Synthesis was in error. In conclusion, one more historical revision is suggested.
The conventionalist epistemology of cultural anthropology can be seen to be embedded in the metho... more The conventionalist epistemology of cultural anthropology can be seen to be embedded in the methods of ‘cognitive anthropology’, the study of folk conceptual systems. These methods result in indiscriminately depicting all folk systems as conventional, whether or not the systems are intended by the native to represent objective features of the world. Hypothetical and actual ethnographic situations are discussed. It is concluded that the anthropologist's projection of his/her own epistemology onto a native system is ethnocentric. This epistemological prejudice may be peculiar to the cognitive sciences.
is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conc... more is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conclusions from what he takes to be the present state of cognitive science. One shocker was his suggestion that a great many lexical concepts (e.g. "xylophone, " "grandmother") might be innate (1983, p. 279). Another, the topic of Garrett and Graham's paper, is his argument that a naturalistic psychology (NP) is impossible in practice. One may take a variety of stances with respect to these claims. Some regard them as stunning discoveries, others simply as puzzles for cognitive philosophers and psychologists to solve, still others as reductiones ad absurdum of the entire enterprise of cognitive science. Garrett and Graham defend NP. They claim to argue not against Fodor's cognitive "computationalism" but only against his rejection of NP. While I share many of their intuitions regarding criteria for scientific status, Garrett and Graham do not succeed in the task they set for themselves. Their rejection of Fodor's anti-naturalism succeeds only if certain central tenets of Fodor's cognitivism (rationalism, computationalism) are also rejected. In other words, Garrett and Graham belong in the "reductio ad absurdum" camp of Fodor's commentators.
is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conc... more is not one of our more cautious and hesitant thinkers. He has derived some quite astonishing conclusions from what he takes to be the present state of cognitive science. One shocker was his suggestion that a great many lexical concepts (e.g. "xylophone, " "grandmother") might be innate (1983, p. 279). Another, the topic of Garrett and Graham's paper, is his argument that a naturalistic psychology (NP) is impossible in practice. One may take a variety of stances with respect to these claims. Some regard them as stunning discoveries, others simply as puzzles for cognitive philosophers and psychologists to solve, still others as reductiones ad absurdum of the entire enterprise of cognitive science. Garrett and Graham defend NP. They claim to argue not against Fodor's cognitive "computationalism" but only against his rejection of NP. While I share many of their intuitions regarding criteria for scientific status, Garrett and Graham do not succeed in the task they set for themselves. Their rejection of Fodor's anti-naturalism succeeds only if certain central tenets of Fodor's cognitivism (rationalism, computationalism) are also rejected. In other words, Garrett and Graham belong in the "reductio ad absurdum" camp of Fodor's commentators.
The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology This document is not a reproduction of t... more The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology This document is not a reproduction of the original published article. It is a facsimile of the text, arranged to have the same pagination as the published version.
During the early part of the 20th century most embryologists were skeptical about the significanc... more During the early part of the 20th century most embryologists were skeptical about the significance of Mendelian genetics to embryological development. A few embryologists began to study the developmental effects of Mendelian genes around 1940. Such work was a necessary step on the path to modern developmental biology. It occurred during the time when the Evolutionary Synthesis was integrating Mendelian and population genetics into a unified evolutionary theory. Why did the first embryological geneticists begin their study at that particular time? One possible explanation is that developmental genetics was a potential avenue of alliance between embryology and evolutionary biology, two fields that had been separated since the 1890s. To assess this possible motive it is necessary to explore the methodological contrasts that obtained between embryology and both Mendelian-chromosomal genetics and neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. Some of these contrasts persist to the present day.
Continuing tensions exist between mainstream bioethics and advocates of the disability rights mov... more Continuing tensions exist between mainstream bioethics and advocates of the disability rights movement. This paper explores some of the grounds for those tensions as exemplified in From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice by Allen Buchanan and coauthors, a book by four prominent bioethicists that is critical of the disability rights movement. One set of factors involves the nature of disability and impairment. A second set involves presumptions regarding social values, including the importance of intelligence in relation to other human characteristics, competition as the basis of social organization, and the nature of the parent-child relationship. The authors' disapproval of certain aspects of the disability rights movement can be seen to be associated with particular positions regarding these factors. Although the authors intend to use a method of 'broad reflective equilibrium,' we argue that their idiosyncratic commitment to particular concepts of disability and particular social values produces a narrowing of the moral significance of their conclusions regarding disability rights.
Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The ... more Homology refers to the underlying sameness of distinct body parts or other organic features. The concept became crucial to the understanding of relationships among organisms during the early nineteenth century, and it remains important today. Definitions of homology have changed with the progress of biology, and even today different versions are associated with different research agendas. The differences illustrate philosophical issues about the workings of definition and explanation in science.
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf ... more Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
In this book Ron Amundson examines 200 years of scientific views on the evolution-development rel... more In this book Ron Amundson examines 200 years of scientific views on the evolution-development relationship from the perspective of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo). This new perspective challenges several popular views about the history of evolutionary thought by claiming that many earlier authors made history come out right for the Evolutionary Synthesis. The book starts with a revised history of nineteenth-century evolutionary thought. It then investigates how development became irrelevant to evolution with the Evolutionary Synthesis. It concludes with an examination of the contrasts that persist between mainstream evolutionary theory and evo-devo.
Owen's essay "On the Nature of Limbs" was originally published in 1849. Illustrations from the bo... more Owen's essay "On the Nature of Limbs" was originally published in 1849. Illustrations from the book are available at: http://press.uchicago.edu/books/owen/index.html
"The most prominent naturalist in Britain before Charles Darwin, Richard Owen made empirical discoveries and offered theoretical innovations that were crucial to the proof of evolution. Among his many lasting contributions to science was the first clear definition of the term homology—“the same organ in different animals under every variety of form and function.” He also graphically demonstrated that all vertebrate species were built on the same skeletal plan and devised the vertebrate archetype as a representation of the simplest common form of all vertebrates.
Just as Darwin’s ideas continue to propel the modern study of adaptation, so too will Owen’s contributions fuel the new interest in homology, organic form, and evolutionary developmental biology. His theory of the archetype and his views on species origins were first offered to the general public in On the Nature of Limbs, published in 1849. It reemerges here in a facsimile edition with introductory essays by prominent historians, philosophers, and practitioners from the modern evo-devo community."
Blog entitled "What Sorts of People Should there Be?" , 2009
In which I propose an alternative to the crude "Theory of Mind Deficit" theory of Baron-Cohen and... more In which I propose an alternative to the crude "Theory of Mind Deficit" theory of Baron-Cohen and Frith, and also to Ian Hacking's Wittgensteinian "Form of Life" theory (which is at least an improvement). Following ideas suggested by autists Jim Sinclair and Cal Montgomery, I propose a "Recognition of Difference" theory. By this theory, autistic children give different answers than nonautistic children when presented with puzzles like those that support the Baron-Cohen theory because autistic children _already know_ that their own perceptions are different from those of their non-autistic peers (and of the adults who are theorizing about them). I apologize for failing to update this post in the intervening years.
Uploads
Papers by Ron Amundson
"The most prominent naturalist in Britain before Charles Darwin, Richard Owen made empirical discoveries and offered theoretical innovations that were crucial to the proof of evolution. Among his many lasting contributions to science was the first clear definition of the term homology—“the same organ in different animals under every variety of form and function.” He also graphically demonstrated that all vertebrate species were built on the same skeletal plan and devised the vertebrate archetype as a representation of the simplest common form of all vertebrates.
Just as Darwin’s ideas continue to propel the modern study of adaptation, so too will Owen’s contributions fuel the new interest in homology, organic form, and evolutionary developmental biology. His theory of the archetype and his views on species origins were first offered to the general public in On the Nature of Limbs, published in 1849. It reemerges here in a facsimile edition with introductory essays by prominent historians, philosophers, and practitioners from the modern evo-devo community."