In a recent article we argued that organizational ecology is not a Darwinian research program. John Lemos criticized our argumentation on various counts. Here we reply to some of Lemos’s criticisms.
Dawkins, R.1976. The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
Hull, D.L.1978. A matter of individuality. Philosophy of Science45:335-60.
3.
Lemos, J.2009. In defense of organizational evolution. A reply to Reydon and Scholz. Philosophy of the Social Sciences39: 463-474.
4.
Mayr, E.1963. Populations, species, and evolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Mayr, E.1976. Evolution and the diversity of life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
Reydon, T.A.C., and M. Scholz.2009. Why organizational ecology is not a Darwinian research program. Philosophy of the Social Sciences39: 408-439.
7.
Scholz, M., and T.A.C. Reydon.2008a. The population ecology programme in organization studies: Problems caused by unwarranted theory transfer. Philosophy of Management6:39-51.
8.
Scholz, M., and T.A.C. Reydon.2008b. Wie praktische Probleme aus ungerechtfertigter Theorieübertragung hervorgehen können: Eine Fallstudie des populationsökologischen Ansatzes in der Organisationstheorie. In Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensethik, ed. A. G. Scherer and M. Patzer, 125-43. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
