Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T05:06:31.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lack of evidentiary criteria for exaptations?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2003

James L. Dannemiller
James L. Dannemiller
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53705 dannemiller@waisman.wisc.edu http://www.waisman.wisc.edu/vislab/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Andrews et al. criticize Gould and colleagues for (1) failing to provide evidentiary criteria for accepting exaptationist alternatives to adaptationist explanations, and (2) seeing exaptations and spandrels as being far more frequent than adaptations in the evolutionary history of modern humans. I argue that the first of these criticisms is wrong, and the second reflects a bias for the classical version of Darwinian evolutionary theory, which Gould was trying to expand by proposing concepts like exaptation and spandrels.

Type
Brief Report
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , August 2002 , pp. 512 - 513
Copyright
© 2002 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)