title: Did Darwin really answer Paley's question?
abstract: It is commonly thought that natural selection explains the rise of adaptive complexity. Razeto-Barry and Frick (2011) have recently argued in favour of this view, dubbing it the Creative View. I argue that the Creative View is mistaken if it claims that natural selection serves to answer Paley's question. This is shown by a case that brings out the contrastive structure inherent in this demand for explanation. There is, however, a rather trivial sense in which specific environmental conditions are crucial for the rise of specific adaptations, but this is hardly what opponents of the Creative View are denying.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden. bjorn.brunnander@philosophy.su.se
authors.forename: Björn
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Brunnander
mesh_terms: D005828:Genetics, Population / Q000266:history*; D008957:Models, Genetic; D012641:Selection, Genetic
keywords: Contrastive explanation; Creative View; Darwin; Natural selection; Paley’s question