Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Influence of Genetics on Contemporary Thinking pp 97–113Cite as

The Influence of Genetics on Philosophy of Science

Classical genetics and the structuralist view of theories

  • Chapter

  • 624 Accesses

Part of the book series: Logic, Epistemology, and The Unity of Science ((LEUS,volume 6))

Abstract

Taking as starting point the first textbook of classical genetics that clearly exemplifies all the features that Kuhn takes to be constitutive of a science textbook, Sinnott and Dunn’s (1925), as well as Darden’s (1991) and Schaffner’s (1980, 1986, 1993) analyses of the structure of biomedical and/or biological theories, I will discuss the problem of the existence of laws in biology. The framework of this discussion is provided by the structuralist conception of theories. The result of this analysis will be the identification of the fundamental law of classical genetics: the law of matching, which satisfies all weak necessary conditions for law-likeness that are postulated by the structuralist approach of theories, and the recognition of the so-called ‘Mendel’s Laws’ as special laws of classical genetics. This shows that the structuralist view is capable of providing an interesting perspective on genetics, which, in turn, has a positive influence on philosophy of science, because it shows we have a framework at hand in which important philosophical problems can fruitfully be addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Balzer W (1979a) Die epistemologische Rolle des zweiten Newtonschen Axioms. Philosophia Naturalis 17:131–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W (1979b) Logische versus physikalische Definitionen in der physikalischen Begriffsbildung In: Balzer W, Kamlah A (eds) Aspekte der physikalischen Begriffsbildung. Theoretischer Begriffe und operationale Definitionen, Friedr. Vieweg and Sohn, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden, 13–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W, Dawe CM (1990) Models for genetics. München Institut für Philosophie, Logik und issenschaftstheorie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W, Lorenzano P (1997) The logical structure of classical genetics. Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 31:243–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W, Sneed J (1977/1978), Generalized Net Structures of Empirical Theories I and II. Studia Logica 36:195–211; 37, 167–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W, Moulines CU, Sneed J (1987) An architectonic for science. The Structuralist Program, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer W, Moulines CU, Sneed J (eds) (2000) Structuralist knowledge representation: paradigmatic examples, Rodopi, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartelborth Th (1988) Eine logische Rekonstruktion der klassischen Elektrodynamik. Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1980) Optimal-design models and the strategy of model building in evolutionary biology. Philos Sci 47:532–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1981) What’s Wrong with the Received View of Evolutionary Theory? In: Asquith PD, Nickles T (eds), PSA 1980, Philosophy of Science Association, vol. 2, East Lansing, Michigan, 397–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1995) The evolutionary contingency thesis. In: Wolters G, Lennox J (eds) Theories and rationality in the biological sciences, the second annual pittsburgh/konstanz coloquim in the philosophy of science, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA, pp 45–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett AJ (1964) Mendel’s Laws? School Science Review 46:35–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett AJ (1965) Mendel and Mendelism: A Possible Reinterpretation. Journal of the Institute of Biology 12:72–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beurton PJ, Falk R, Rheinberger H-J (eds) (2000) The concept of the gene in development and evolution, historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowler P (1989) The mendelian revolution. The Athlone Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon RN (1997) Does Biology Have Laws? The Experimental Evidence, Philos Sci 64, Proceedings, S444–S457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon RN (1978) Adaptation and evolutionary theory. Stud Hist Phil Sci 9:181–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon RN (1981) A structural description of evolutionary biology. In: Asquith PD, Nickles T (eds) PSA 1980, Philosophy of Science Association, vol 2, East Lansing, Michigan pp 427–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadevall i Soler M (1988) La estructura de la teorìa de la evoluciòn. Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correns C (1900) Gregor Mendels Regel über das Verhalten der Nachkommenschaft der Bastarde. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 18:158–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darden L (1991) Theory change in science. Strategies from Mendelian genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darden L (1996) Essay review. Generalizations in biology. Kenneth F Schaffner, Discovery and explanations in biology and medicine, University of Chicago Press, Stud Hist Phil Sci 27(3):409–419.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dawe CM (1982) The structure of genetics, Doctoral Dissertation, University of London, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dìez JA, Lorenzano P (2002) La concepciòn estructuralista en el contexto de la filosofìa de la ciencia del siglo XX. In: Dìez JA, Lorenzano P (eds) Desarrollos actuales de la metateorìa estructuralista: problemas y discusiones, Quilmes: Universidad Nacional de Quilmes/Universidad Autònoma de Zacatecas /Universidad Rovira i Virgili, pp 13–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgin M (2003) Biology and a priori laws. Philos Sci 70: 1380–1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (1991) The semantic approach to evolutionary theory. Biology and Philosophy 6:59–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck L (1935) Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache. Einfuhrung in die Lehre vom Denskstil und Denkkollektiv, Benno Schwabe and Co, Basel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor J (1974) Special sciences (or: the disunity of science as a working hypothesis). Synthese 28:97–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor J (1991) Hedged laws and psychological explanations. Mind 100:19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1989) Wonderful life. The burgess shale and the ature of history, WW. Norton and Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary theory. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG, Oppenheim P (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philos Sci 15:135–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull D (1974) Philosophy of biological science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller EF (2000) The century of the gene. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P (1984) (1953) And all that: a tale of two sciences. The Philos Rev 93:335–373.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P (1989) Explanatory unification and the causal structure of the world. In: Kitcher P, Salmon WC (eds) Scientific explanation, minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, vol 13. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 410–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyburg HE (1968) Philosophy of science: a formal approach. The Macmillan Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn TS (1959) The essential tension: tradition and innovation in scientific research. In: Taylor CW (ed) The third (1959) university of utah research conference on the identification of scientific talent, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp 162–174; reissued in The essential tension. selected studies in scientific tradition and change, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1977, pp 225–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn TS (1962/1970) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin RC (1974) The genetic basis of evolutionary change. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer A, Simon N (1980) The formal structure of genetics and the reduction problem. In: Asquith PD, Giere RN (eds) PSA 1980, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, pp 160–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd E (1988) The structure and confirmation of evolutionary theory. Greenwood Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (1995) Geschichte und Struktur der klassischen Genetik. Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (1997) Hacia una nueva interpretaciòn de la obra de Mendel. In: Ahumada J, Morey P (eds) Selecciòn de trabajos de las VII Jornadas de Epistemologìa e Historia de la Ciencia, Còrdoba: Facultad de Filosofìa y Humanidades, Universidad Nacional de Còrdoba, pp 220–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2000) Classical genetics and the theory-net of genetics. In: Balzer W, Moulines CU, Sneed J (eds) Structuralist knowledge representation: paradigmatic examples, Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp 251–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2001) On biological laws and the laws of biological sciences. Rev Pat Fil 2:29–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2002a) La teorìa del gen y la red teòrica de la genètica. In: Dìez JA, Lorenzano P (eds) Desarrollos actuales de la metateorìa estructuralista: problemas y discusiones, Quilmes: Universidad Nacional de Quilmes/Universidad Autònoma de Zacatecas /Universidad Rovira i Virgili, pp 285–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2002b) Leyes fundamentales, refinamientos y especializaciones: del ‘Mendelismo’ a la ‘teorìa del gen’. In: Lorenzano P, Molina FT (eds) Filosofìa e Historia de la Ciencia en el Cono Sur, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, Quilmes, pp 379–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2002c) Kenneth Schaffner, las teorìas de alcance intermedio y la concepciòn estructuralista de las teorìas, communication presented at the conference III Encuentro Iberoamericano sobre Metateorìa Estructural, Granada, España.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2006) Fundamental Laws and Laws of Biology. In: Ernst G, Niebergall K-G (eds.), Philosophie der Wissenschaft – Wissenschaft der Philosophie. Festschrift f?lises Moulines zum 60. Geburstag, Mentis-Verlag, Paderborn, 129–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzano P (2006) La emergencia de un programa de investigación genética. In: Lorenzano, P, Martins, LA-CP, Regner, AC (eds) Ciências da vida: estudos filosóficos e históricos, Associação de Filosofia e História da Ciência do Cone Sul (AFHIC), Campinas, pp 333–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1991a) Eine neue Philosophie der Biologie. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1991b) One long argument: charles darwin and the genesis of modern evolutionary thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morange M (2001) The misunderstood gene. Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan TH (1913) Heredity and sex. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan TH (1919) The physical basis of heredity. Lippincott, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moya A (1989) Sobre la estructura de la teorìa de la evoluciòn. Anthropos, Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosterìn J (1984) Conceptos y teorìas en la ciencia. Alianza, Madrid, 2nd edn. 1987

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulines CU (1978/1982) Forma y funciòn de los principios-guìa en las teorìas fìsicas. In: Exploraciones metacientìficas, Alianza, Madrid, pp 88–107 (first publication as Cuantificadores existenciales y principios-guìa en las teorìas fìsicas. Crìtica 10 (1978):59–88. Translated as Existential quantifiers and guiding principles in physical theories. In: Gracia JJE, Rabossi E, Villanueva E, Dascal M (eds) Philosophical analysis in latin america, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984:173–198).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulines CU (1991) Pluralidad y recursiòn. Alianza, Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munson R (1975) Is biology a provincial science? Philos Sci 42:428–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nägeli Cv (1884) Mechanisch-physiologische Theorie der Abstammungslehre. R. Oldenburg, München and Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olby R (1979) Mendel no Mendelian? History of Science 17:57–72. Reissued in: Olby R (1985) Origins of Mendelism, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2nd edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzotti M, Zanardo A (1986) Axiomatization of genetics I and II. J Theor Biol 118:61–71, 145–172.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg A (1985) The structure of biological science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (1970) Are there laws in biology? Australas J Philos 48:234–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (1973) The philosophy of biology. Hutchinson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon WC (1989) Four decades of scientific explanation. In: Kitcher P, Salmon WC (eds) Scientific explanation, minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, vol 13, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 3–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S (1998) Genetics and reductionism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner KF (1980) Theory structures in the biomedical sciences. The J Med Philos 5:57–97.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner KF (1986) Exemplar reasoning about biological models and diseases: a relation between the philosophy of medicine and philosophy of science. The J Med Philos 11:63–80.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner KF (1993) Discovery and explanations in biology and medicine. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlick M (1918) Allgemeine erkenntnislehre. Julius Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinnott EW, Dunn LC (1925) Principles of genetics: an elementary text, with problems. McGraw-Hill, New York, 2nd edn. 1932; 3rd edn. 1939; with T Dobzhansky as co-author, 4th edn. 1950; 5th edn. 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sintonen M (1991) How evolutionary theory faces the reality. Synthese 89:163–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart JJC (1963) Philosophy and scientific realism. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneed JD (1971) The logical structure of mathematical physics. Reidel, Dordrecht, 2nd revised edn. 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E (1984) The nature of selection: evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E (1993) Philosophy of biology. Westview Press, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E (1997) Two outbreaks of lawlessness in recent philosophy of biology. Philos Sci 64, Proceedings, S458–S467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1973) Theorienstrukturen und Theoriendynamik. Springer, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1976) Eine ‘subjektivistische’ Variante des Begriffs der physikalischen Theorie. In: Neue Wege der Wissenschaftsphilosophie, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York 1980, pp 56–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1978) A combined approach to the dynamics of theories. Boston studies in the philosophy of science 59/136:151–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1979a) The structuralist view: survey, recent development and answers to some criticisms. In: Niiniluoto I, Tuomela R (eds) The logic and epistemology of scientific change (Acta Philosophica Fennica 30), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 113–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1979b) The structuralist view of theories. Springer, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1983) Erklärung–Begründung–Kausalität, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 2nd edn. extended and modified.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1986) Theorie und Erfahrung, Band II, Dritter Halbband, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swartz N (1995) The neo-humean perspective: laws as regularities. In: Weinert F (ed) Laws of nature. essays on the philosophical, scientific and historical dimensions, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 67–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson P (1989) The structure of biological theories. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomi J (1981) Structure and dynamics of darwinian evolutionary theory. Syst Zool 30:22–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomi JyEH (1979) An analysis of natural selection in models of life-history theory. Savonia 3:9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Fraassen B (1977) The only necessity is verbal necessity. J Philos 74:71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Fraassen B (1989), Laws and symmetry. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Fraassen B (1993) Armstrong, Cartwright, and Earman on Laws and Symmetry. Philos Phenomenol Res LIII (2):431–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vries H de (1900a) Sur la loi de disjonction des hybrides. Comptes Rendus de l’Acadèmie des Sciences 130:845–847.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vries de H (1900b) Das Spaltungsgesetz der Bastarde. Ber Deut Botan Ges 18:83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wassermann GD (1981) On the nature of the theory of evolution. Philos Sci 48:416–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinert F (ed) (1995) Laws of nature. Essays on the philosophical, scientific and historical dimensions, de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams MB (1970) Deducing the consequences of evolution: a mathematical model. J Theor Biol 29:343–385.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (1953) Philosophische untersuchungen/philosophical investigations, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodger JH (1959) Studies in the foundations of genetics. In: Henkin L, Suppes P, Tarski A (eds) The axiomatic method, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 408–428.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes – Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Quilmes, Argentina

    Pablo Lorenzano

Authors
  1. Pablo Lorenzano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Collége de France, Paris, France

    Anne Fagot-Largeault

  2. Université de Lille, Paris, France

    Shahid Rahman

  3. Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal and Universidad Nacional del Sur, Bahía Blanca, Argentina

    Juan Manuel Torres

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lorenzano, P. (2007). The Influence of Genetics on Philosophy of Science. In: Fagot-Largeault, A., Rahman, S., Torres, J.M. (eds) The Influence of Genetics on Contemporary Thinking. Logic, Epistemology, and The Unity of Science, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5664-2_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation