Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRacovski, T
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-08T10:08:58Z
dc.date.issued2019-01-07
dc.description.abstractEvolutionary novelty, the origin of new characters such as the turtle shell or the flower, is a fundamental problem for an evolutionary view of life. Accordingly, it is a central research topic in contemporary biology involving input from several biological disciplines and explanations at several levels of organization. As such it raises questions relative to scientific collaboration and multi-level explanations. Novelty is also involved in theoretical debates in evolutionary biology. It has been appropriated by evo-devo, a scientific synthesis linking research on evolution and development. Thanks to its focus on development, evo-devo claims to explain the mechanistic origin of novelties as new forms, while the Modern Synthesis can only provide statistical explanation of evolutionary change. The origin of an evolutionary novelty is a historical emergence of a new character involving form and function. I focus on three neglected dimensions of the problem of novelty, the functional-historical approach to the problem, research on novelty in the Modern Synthesis era and novelty in plants. I compare the evo-devo approach to novelty to a functional-historical approach of novelty. I focus on its origin in Darwin and its presence in the Modern Synthesis. The comparison of the two approaches reveals distance between conceptual frameworks and proximity in explanatory practices. This is partly related to unwarranted conceptual opposition. In particular, I list several ways of distinguishing novelty and adaptation, some of which are not conceptually sound. I then focus on the relation between novelty and adaptation in the Modern Synthesis era, and on the relation of novelty to other fundamental biological problems (speciation, origin of higher taxa, complexity). Pushing this approach further, I challenge the view that the Modern Synthesis excluded development and reached a hardened consensus. Finally, I analyse how Günter Wagner’s developmental theory of novelty applies to novelties in plant.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean Commissionen_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumber324186en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/35377
dc.publisherUniversity of Exeteren_GB
dc.subjectPhilosophy of biologyen_GB
dc.subjectHPSen_GB
dc.subjectHistory of biologyen_GB
dc.subjectNoveltyen_GB
dc.subjectEvo-devoen_GB
dc.subjectModern Synthesisen_GB
dc.subjectEvolutionary biologyen_GB
dc.subjectDevelopmental biologyen_GB
dc.subjectInnovationen_GB
dc.subjectform and functionen_GB
dc.titleEvolutionary novelty: a philosophical and historical investigationen_GB
dc.typeThesis or dissertationen_GB
dc.date.available2019-01-08T10:08:58Z
dc.contributor.advisorDupre, Jen_GB
dc.contributor.advisorHuneman, Pen_GB
dc.contributor.advisorGriffiths, PEen_GB
dc.publisher.departmentSociology, Philosophy, Anthropologyen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden_GB
dc.type.degreetitlePhD in Philosophyen_GB
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen_GB
dc.type.qualificationnameDoctoral Thesisen_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-01-08
exeter.funder::European Commissionen_GB
rioxxterms.versionNAen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-01-07
rioxxterms.typeThesisen_GB
refterms.dateFOA2019-01-08T10:09:03Z


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record