Abstract
The dichotomy between ‘typological thinking’ and ‘population thinking’ features in a range of debates in contemporary and historical biology. The origins of this dichotomy are often traced to Ernst Mayr, who is said to have coined it in the 1950s as a rhetorical device that could be used to shield the Modern Synthesis from attacks by the opponents of population biology. In this two-part essay I argue that the origins of the typology/population dichotomy are considerably more complicated and more interesting than is commonly thought. In this first part, I will argue that Mayr’s dichotomy was based on two distinct type/population contrasts that had been articulated much earlier by George Gaylord Simpson and Theodosius Dobzhansky. Their distinctions made eminent sense in their own, isolated contexts. In the second part, I will show how Mayr conflated these type/population distinctions and blended insome of his own, unrelated concerns with ‘types’ of a rather different sort. Although Mayr told his early critics that he was merely making “a temporary oversimplification,” he ended up burdening the history and philosophy of biology with a troubled dichotomy.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 20-33 |
| Journal | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2015 |
Keywords
- Typology
- Population thinking
- Ernst Mayr
- George Gaylord Simpson
- Theodosius Dobzhansky
- Modern Synthesis
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of '"A temporary oversimplification": Mayr, Simpson, Dobzhansky, and the origins of the typology/population dichotomy (Part 1 of 2)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver