S.J.Gould hat geschrieben: Bookkeeping and causality : the fundamental error of
gene selectionism
The error and the incoherence of gene selectionism, as documented above,
can be summarized in a single Statement illustrating the fruitful, "Pareto-
like" character of the central fallacy : proponents of gene selectionism have
confused bookkeeping with causality. This error achieves its Pareto status of
substantial utility, because changes recorded at the genetic level do play a
fundamental part in characterizing evolution, and records of these changes
(bookkeeping) do maintain an important role in evolutionary theory. But the
error remains: bookkeeping is not causality; natural selection is a causal
process, and units or agents of selection must be defined as overt actors in the
mechanism, not merely as preferred items for tabulating results.
Zitat ist aus einem Werk von Gould. Mir geht es hier um Bookkeeping und Causality. Ich bin dabei etwas zu übersetzen und habe da so meine Schwierigkeiten, dieses in den entsprechenden Zusammenhang zu bringen. vielleicht wird da ja eine interessante Diksussion draus.
