Chance, evolution, and the metaphysical implications of paleontological practice

In K. J. Clark and J. Koperski (ed.), Abrahamic Reflections on Randomness and Providence. pp. 119-143 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

For several decades, a debate has been waged over how to interpret the significance of fossils from the Burgess Shale and Cambrian Explosion. Stephen Jay Gould argued that if the “tape of life” was rerun, then the resulting lineages would differ radically from what we find today, implying that humans are a happy accident of evolution. Simon Conway Morris argued that if the “tape of life” was rerun, the resulting lineages would be similar to what we now observe, implying that intelligence would still emerge from an evolutionary process. Recent methodological innovations in paleontological practice call into question both positions and suggest that global claims about the history of life, whether in terms of essential contingency or predictable convergence, are unwarranted.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,248

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-06

Downloads
25 (#900,448)

6 months
5 (#1,049,387)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alan Love
University of Minnesota

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references