Synthesising arguments and the extended evolutionary synthesis

Area of Science:

• Evolutionary biology
• Philosophy of science

Background:

• Synthesizing arguments drive conceptual and theoretical changes in scientific domains.
• A recent proposal for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) has emerged.
• The EES is often evaluated using a virtue-based approach, treating it as a complete alternative to current evolutionary practice.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critique the suitability of the virtue-based approach for evaluating the EES.
• To propose an agenda-based approach as a more effective evaluation framework for the EES.
• To analyze the concept of niche construction as a case study for this evaluation.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of evaluation frameworks in science.
• Case study analysis focusing on the concept of niche construction within evolutionary biology.
• Comparison of virtue-based and agenda-based approaches to scientific synthesis.

Main Results:

• The virtue-based approach is inadequate for evaluating the EES.
• An agenda-based approach better aligns with the pragmatic and epistemological aims of the EES.
• The agenda-based approach effectively identifies empirical disagreements between the EES and prevailing evolutionary practice.

Conclusions:

• The evaluation of scientific syntheses like the EES should adopt an agenda-based framework.
• This approach facilitates a more nuanced understanding of scientific progress and disagreement.
• Niche construction serves as a key example illustrating the benefits of an agenda-based evaluation for the EES.