The Many Roads to Generality in Ecology

J. Fox
{"title":"The Many Roads to Generality in Ecology","authors":"J. Fox","doi":"10.5840/philtopics20194715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:The variety of nature presents a challenge for ecologists. Individual organisms differ from one another in ways both obvious and subtle, even if they're members of the same species living in the same location. Different populations, species, communities, ecosystems, biomes, habitats, food webs, etc. also differ from another. What, if anything, can be said in general about ecological systems and how they work? If there are generalities in ecology, do they take the form of exceptionless \"laws of nature\" analogous to the laws of physics? Or do they take some other form? Should ecologists even try to identify ecological generalities? If so, how? The variety of nature is matched by the variety of ecologists' answers to those questions. I will suggest that all of their answers are right—sometimes. Here I propose a taxonomy of the many different \"roads to generality\" in ecology: the various different kinds of \"generality\" that ecologists seek. I argue that each road to generality is valuable in its own way, but that different roads are useful in different contexts and for different purposes. Different roads to generality thus can be complementary to one another, and it would be a mistake for the field of ecology as a whole to focus exclusively on any one of them.","PeriodicalId":230797,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Topics","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Topics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics20194715","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT:The variety of nature presents a challenge for ecologists. Individual organisms differ from one another in ways both obvious and subtle, even if they're members of the same species living in the same location. Different populations, species, communities, ecosystems, biomes, habitats, food webs, etc. also differ from another. What, if anything, can be said in general about ecological systems and how they work? If there are generalities in ecology, do they take the form of exceptionless "laws of nature" analogous to the laws of physics? Or do they take some other form? Should ecologists even try to identify ecological generalities? If so, how? The variety of nature is matched by the variety of ecologists' answers to those questions. I will suggest that all of their answers are right—sometimes. Here I propose a taxonomy of the many different "roads to generality" in ecology: the various different kinds of "generality" that ecologists seek. I argue that each road to generality is valuable in its own way, but that different roads are useful in different contexts and for different purposes. Different roads to generality thus can be complementary to one another, and it would be a mistake for the field of ecology as a whole to focus exclusively on any one of them.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生态学中通往普遍性的许多道路
摘要:自然界的多样性给生态学家提出了一个挑战。即使是生活在同一地点的同一物种的成员,个体生物之间也存在着明显和微妙的差异。不同的种群、物种、群落、生态系统、生物群落、栖息地、食物网等也各不相同。关于生态系统及其运作方式,我们可以笼统地说些什么?如果生态学中存在普遍性,它们是否以类似于物理定律的无例外的“自然法则”的形式存在?还是以其他形式存在?生态学家甚至应该尝试识别生态的普遍性吗?如果有,怎么做?自然界的多样性与生态学家对这些问题的不同回答相匹配。我认为他们所有的答案有时都是对的。在这里,我提出了生态学中许多不同的“通往普遍性之路”的分类:生态学家所寻求的各种不同类型的“普遍性”。我认为,每条通往普遍性的道路都有其自身的价值,但不同的道路在不同的环境和不同的目的下是有用的。因此,通往普遍性的不同道路可以相互补充,作为一个整体,生态学领域只关注其中的任何一条都是错误的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Political Polarization and Social Media Interactive Self-Deception in Digital Spaces Absurd Stories, Ideologies & Motivated Cognition Conspiracy Theories as Serious Play Testimonial Epistemic Rights in Online Spaces
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1