Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T02:12:47.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biological Species as Natural Kinds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

David B. Kitts  and
David J. Kitts
David B. Kitts
Affiliation:
University of Oklahoma
David J. Kitts
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The fact that the names of biological species refer independently of identifying descriptions does not support the view of Ghiselin and Hull that species are individuals. Species may be regarded as natural kinds whose members share an essence which distinguishes them from the members of other species and accounts for the fact that they are reproductively isolated from the members of other species. Because evolutionary theory requires that species be spatiotemporally localized their names cannot occur in scientific laws. If natural kind status is denied to species on this ground, it must also be denied to most classes of concrete entities which are now accorded such status.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , December 1979 , pp. 613 - 622
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1979

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.)

Footnotes

†

We have benefited from David Hull's response to an earlier and quite different version of this paper. We should like to thank Sabetai Unguru, Chris Swoyer and Kenneth Taylor—all of whom offered valuable suggestions for the improvement of the paper which we attempted to incorporate into the final version. It must not be supposed, of course, that they would now subscribe to everything we have said.

References

Ghiselin, M. T. (1975), “A radical solution to the species problem,” Systematic Zoology, Vol. 23, pp. 536–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D. L. (1976), “Are species really individuals?” Systematic Zoology, Vol. 25, pp. 174–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D. L. (1978), “A matter of individuality,” Philosophy of Science 45: 335–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, S. (1972), “Naming and necessity,” in Davidson, D. and Harman, G. eds. Semantics of Natural Language, Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (1970), “Is semantics possible?” in Kiefer, H. E. and Munitz, M. K. (eds.) Language, Belief and Metaphysics, Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1969), Principles of Systematic Zoology, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Weinberg, S. (1977), The First Three Minutes, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar