•  59
    Is there such a thing as “group selection” in the contextual analysis framework?
    History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 36 (4): 484-502. 2015.
    This paper argues that the contextual approach to natural selection does not offer an estimation of the contributions of individual and group selection to evolutionary change in multi-level selection scenarios, and that this is so because the term “group selection”, as defined by the contextual approach, does not refer to a process taking place at the group level. In the contextual analysis framework, this term simply denotes an evolutionary change that takes place due to the fact that, overall,…Read more
  •  21
    Multi-level selection and the issue of environmental homogeneity
    Biology and Philosophy 32 (5): 651-681. 2017.
    In this paper, I identify two general positions with respect to the relationship between environment and natural selection. These positions consist in claiming that selective claims need and, respectively, need not be relativized to homogenous environments. I then show that adopting one or the other position makes a difference with respect to the way in which the effects of selection are to be measured in certain cases in which the focal population is distributed over heterogeneous environments.…Read more
  •  14
    In "Some Criticism of the Contextual Approach, and a Few Proposals" in Biological Theory, Brian McLoone discusses some of the points about the contextual approach that I made in a recent paper. Besides offering a reply to McLoone’s comments on my paper, in this article I show why McLoone’s discussion of the two main frameworks for thinking about group selection—the contextual and the Price approach—is partly misguided. In particular, I show that one of McLoone’s main arguments against the contex…Read more
  •  5
    This paper shows that Quentin Meillassoux’s speculative materialism doesn’t offer us the means to account for the ancestral statements that the modern sciences produce, i.e. for the scientific statements about events preceding all forms of life. An analysis of the reasons why Meillassoux thinks that the problem of ancestrality problematizes the contemporary self-evidence of correlationism is first offered. The results of this analysis are then applied to speculative materialism itself and the co…Read more
  •  4
    Pouvoir foucaldien et sélection naturelle. Une comparaison et une divergence
    Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 4 (2): 318-342. 2012.
    This paper has a triple aim. First of all, it makes a comparison between Foucault’s notion of power relations and the notion of natural selection as it has been developed, since Darwin, by evolutionary biology. A number of common points between these two notions are analyzed here, such as acting on a spontaneity, facticity, fundamental visibility and global character. By analyzing these common points, this paper attempts – and this is its second aim – to indicate and criticize several preconcept…Read more
  •  2
    This paper attempts to put some order among the different notions of pain that are to be found in the Nietzschean philosophical corpus. It tries to show that there is a mutation of the Nietzschean concept of pain, from the notion of pain as evaluation to that of pain as localization of a commotion. Therefore pain is not in itself the source of a reaction, but is actually a consequence of a commotion that a reaction has already addressed by the time of the appearance of pain. A deeper notion of p…Read more
  •  2
    This paper argues that Jean-Paul Sartre’s discussion of violence from his Notebooks for an ethics constitutes an attempt to go beyond an instrumental view of violence. An “instrumental view of violence” essentially assumes that violent behavior is a form of pragmatic behavior whose distinguishing feature consists in the kind of means one employs for reaching one’s goals. For his part, Sartre attempts to provide a stronger demarcation between violent and pragmatic behaviors. First, violent behavi…Read more
  •  2
    Pourquoi revient-on toujours à Darwin? (review)
    Meta 3 (1): 221-230. 2011.
  •  1
    Georges Canguilhem et la question de la « subjectivité » vitale
    Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 6 (2): 506-525. 2014.
    This paper outlines a hypothesis regarding the close connection between two problems in Georges Canguilhem’s work. The first problem is that of Canguilhem’s insistence to include considerations about natural selection in his work and of the role that this notion could play therein. The second problem consists in Canguilhem’s tendency to often use the term “life” as the subject of his sentences, even though this tendency may seem to at least partially contradict some of the central theses advance…Read more
  • Les bulles, le « dépli » et la philosophie (review)
    Meta 4 (1): 231-240. 2012.