Evolutionary epistemology as a scientific method: a new look upon the units and levels of evolution debate

2017

Language Sciences

Self Cite

Modern evolutionary biology is currently characterized by epistemological divergence because, beyond organisms and genes, scholars nowadays investigate a plurality of units of evolution, they recognize multilevel selection, and especially from within the Extended Synthesis, scholars have identified a plurality of evolutionary mechanisms that besides natural selection can explain how the evolution of anatomical form and functional behavior occur. Evolutionary linguists have also implicated a multitude of units, levels and mechanisms involved in (aspects of) language evolution, which has also brought forth epistemological divergence on how language possibly evolved. Here, we examine how a general evolutionary methodology can become abstracted from how biologists study evolution, and how this methodology can become implemented into the field of Evolutionary Linguistics. Applied Evolutionary Epistemology (AEE) involves a systematic search and analysis of the units (that what evolves), levels (loci where evolution takes place), and mechanisms (means whereby evolution occurs) of language evolution, allocating them into ontological hierarchies, and distinguishing them from other kinds of evolution. In this paper in particular, we give an in-depth analysis of how AEE enables an identification, examination, and evaluation of levels and mechanisms of language evolution, and we hone in on how hierarchies and mechanisms of language (evolution) can and have been defined differentially. For an in-depth analysis of units of language evolution, we refer the reader to Gontier (2017) for which this paper functions as a follow-up. Thus, rather than present a specific theory of how language evolved, we present a methodology that enables us to unite existing research programs as well as to develop theories on the subject at hand.

Section: The Applied Evolutionary Epistemological Approach (Aee)mentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the levels and mechanisms/processes of language evolution?

2017

Language Sciences

Self Cite

“…Beyond natural selection, scholars working from within an extended synthesis (Pigliucci 2007) have identified numerous additional mechanisms and processes whereby evolution occurs, including drift (Kimura 1968 (Gontier 2010a(Gontier , b, 2012. Put negatively, definitions of units and levels of evolution are often biased toward natural selection theory.…”

Section: Defining Units Levels and Mechanisms From Within An Extendmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The heuristics will only function properly when databases of the units, levels and mechanisms, and the hierarchies they form, are developed that are accessible for everyone (Gontier 2010a(Gontier , b, 2012. AI and the internet could play a major role here.…”

Section: Prospectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, we circumvent the definitional problem and show how applied evolutionary epistemology (AEE) provides a uniform methodology for evolutionary linguists (part 3). AEE (Gontier 2010a(Gontier , b, 2012) is a methodology derived from how Universal Darwinists study how evolution occurs by means of natural selection, but it also incorporates theories associated with an extended synthesis. AEE defines evolution as the phenomena where units evolve at levels of an ontological hierarchy by mechanisms.…”

Section: Introduction and Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What are the Units of Language Evolution?

2017

Topoi

Self Cite

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com".

“…Current research is evolutionizing all. We are evolving toward a recognition of the existence of multiple units, levels, mechanisms, and kinds of evolution, and it is the challenge of our and future generations to investigate how they together make up the multilinear and multidimensional biological realities that have evolved (Gontier 2010a).…”

Section: Conclusion: Reintegrating History By Reconstructing Biorealimentioning

confidence: 99%

Uniting Micro- with Macroevolution into an Extended Synthesis: Reintegrating Life’s Natural History into Evolution Studies

Interdisciplinary Evolution Research

2015

Self Cite

The Modern Synthesis explains the evolution of life at a mesolevel by identifying phenotype-environmental interactions as the locus of evolution and by identifying natural selection as the means by which evolution occurs. Both microand macroevolutionary schools of thought are post-synthetic attempts to evolutionize phenomena above and below organisms that have traditionally been conceived as non-living. Microevolutionary thought associates with the study of how genetic selection explains higher-order phenomena such as speciation and extinction, while macroevolutionary research fields understand species and higher taxa as biological individuals and they attribute evolutionary causation to biotic and abiotic factors that transcend genetic selection. The microreductionist and macroholistic research schools are characterized as two distinct epistemic cultures where the former favor mechanical explanations, while the latter favor historical explanations of the evolutionary process by identifying recurring patterns and trends in the evolution of life. I demonstrate that both cultures endorse radically different notions on time and explain how both perspectives can be unified by endorsing epistemic pluralism. Keywords Microevolution • Macroevolution • Origin of life • Evolutionary biology • Sociocultural evolution • Natural history • Organicism • Biorealities • Units, levels and mechanisms of evolution • Major transitions • Hierarchy theory But how … shall we describe a process which nobody has seen performed, and of which no written history gives any account? This is only to be investigated, first, in examining the nature of those solid bodies, the history of which we want to know; and 2dly, in examining the natural operations of the globe, in order to see if there now actually exist such operations, as, from the nature of the solid bodies, appear to have been necessary to their formation. (Hutton, cited in Teggart 1916: 249