Details
| Originalsprache | Englisch |
|---|---|
| Seiten (von - bis) | 873-892 |
| Fachzeitschrift | Philosophical Psychology |
| Jahrgang | 25 |
| Publikationsstatus | Veröffentlicht - 2012 |
Zitieren
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTex
- RIS
Why the (gene) counting argument fails in the massive modularity debate: The need for understanding gene concepts and genotype-phenotype relationships. / Reydon, Thomas; Plaisance, K. S.; Elgin, M.
in: Philosophical Psychology, Jahrgang 25, 2012, S. 873-892.
in: Philosophical Psychology, Jahrgang 25, 2012, S. 873-892.
Publikation: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift › Artikel › Forschung › Peer-Review
Reydon, T, Plaisance, KS & Elgin, M 2012, 'Why the (gene) counting argument fails in the massive modularity debate: The need for understanding gene concepts and genotype-phenotype relationships', Philosophical Psychology, Jg. 25, S. 873-892.
Reydon, T., Plaisance, K. S., & Elgin, M. (2012). Why the (gene) counting argument fails in the massive modularity debate: The need for understanding gene concepts and genotype-phenotype relationships. Philosophical Psychology, 25, 873-892.
Download
@article{ff406c626ce941e8ba8cdbc8176343d4,
title = "Why the (gene) counting argument fails in the massive modularity debate: The need for understanding gene concepts and genotype-phenotype relationships",
author = "Thomas Reydon and Plaisance, {K. S.} and M. Elgin",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "873--892",
journal = "Philosophical Psychology",
issn = "0951-5089",
publisher = "Routledge",
}
Download
TY - JOUR
T1 - Why the (gene) counting argument fails in the massive modularity debate: The need for understanding gene concepts and genotype-phenotype relationships
AU - Reydon, Thomas
AU - Plaisance, K. S.
AU - Elgin, M.
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
M3 - Article
VL - 25
SP - 873
EP - 892
JO - Philosophical Psychology
JF - Philosophical Psychology
SN - 0951-5089
ER -