Skip to main content

Francis Bacon, Karl Popper, Michael Polanyi, and Modern Experimental Biology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Encouraging Openness

Part of the book series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science ((BSPS,volume 325))

  • 366 Accesses

Abstract

Francis Bacon, widely appreciated as the father of the experimental method in science, proposed that science is inductive. Popper put critical testing of hypotheses against empirical evidence at the center of his epistemology, thereby excluding the act of conceiving or inventing a hypothesis or theory from his logical analysis of science. Michael Polanyi considered science as a social system based on epistemic authority and apprenticeship, stressing the informal and personal aspects of science. Using cases from genetics, embryology, molecular biology, and genomics, this essay (i) shows that induction, scientific authority and critical theory testing have been integral parts of scientific practice in the history of modern biology since the nineteenth century. This is despite the fact that a rigid adherence to Popper’s principle of falsifiability is irreconcilable with scientific practice. (ii) analyzes the change of epistemology within recent developments in biology, particularly big data genomics. In these induction plays a major role while Polanyi’s notions of epistemic authority and apprenticeship as well as Popper’s principles of hypothesis, prediction and experimental testing are largely marginalized. The consequences of their disregard are discussed.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agassi, Joseph. 1981. Science and society: Studies in the sociology of science, Boston studies in the philosophy and history of science. Dordrecht/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. The very idea of modern science. Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle, Boston studies in the philosophy and history of science. Dordrecht/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Chris. 2008. The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. 23 June 2008. http://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016.

  • Bar-Am, Nimrod. 2014. The structure of scientific revolutions, fourth edition, 50th anniversary. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 44: 688. doi: 10.1177/0048393112473424 (http://pos.sagepub.com/content/44/5/688)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthelmess, Alfred. 1952. Vererbungswissenschaft. Freiburg: Alber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calver, N. 2013. Sir Peter Medawar: Science, creativity and the popularization of Karl Popper. Notes and records. The Royal Society for the History of Science. 22 May 2013. doi: 10.1098/rsnr.2013.0022.

  • Canguilhem, Georges. [1952] 2009. Die Erkenntnis des Lebens (trans. from French: La connaissance de la vie). Berlin: August Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coveney, P.V., Edward R. Dougherty, and Roger R. Highfield. 2016. Big data need big theory too. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0153.

  • D’Arcy Thompson, W. [1917] 1942. On growth and form, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, E.H. 2006. The regulatory genome: Gene regulatory networks in development and evolution. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Genomics, “discovery science”, systems biology, and causal explanation: What really works? Perspect.Biol.Med. 58: 165–181. doi:10.1353/pbm.2015.0025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deichmann, U. 2004. Early responses to Avery’s et al.’s 1944 paper on DNA as hereditary material. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences. 34 (2): 207–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Michael Polanyi on scientific authority and his criticisms of Popper and Russell. In Yearbook of the Leo Baeck Institute, vol. 56, 249–268. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Discovery science. 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_science. Accessed 25 Aug 2016.

  • Gliboff, S. 1999. Gregor Mendel and the laws of evolution. History of Science 37: 217–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith, P. 2008. Induction, Samples, and Kinds. For a collection of papers from the 2008 Inland Northwest Philosophy Conference. http://philosophy.fas.nyu.edu/docs/IO/11840/pgsinduction.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2016.

  • Jacobs, S. 2002. Polanyi’s presagement of the incommensurability concept. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science A. 33: 105–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herskowitz, I.H. 1962. Genetics. Boston: Little, Brown, Supplements.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, E.A. 2012. Bridges between mathematics, natural sciences, architecture and art: case of fullerenes. Book of papers and extended abstracts of the 1st International Conference “Art, Science and Technology: Interaction between Three Cultures”, ed. by T. Kravchuk, A. Groysman, C. Soddu, E. Colabella and G. Leisman, 60–71. Milano: Domus Argenia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrach, H. 2016. Interview with Hans Lehrach by Ute Deichmann. Berlin, 9 February 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, J. 1916. The organism as a whole from a physicochemical viewpoint. New York/London: Putnam’s Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maderspacher, F. 2008. Theodor Boveri and the natural experiment. Current Biology 18 (R): 278–R286. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.02.061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medawar, P. [1963] 1996. Hypothesis and imagination. Times Lit. Suppl. (25 October 1963), in: Medawar, P. 1996. The strange case of the spotted mice and other classic essays on science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendel, G. 1866. Experiments in plant hybridization (Versuche űber Pflanzen-Hybriden). Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereins in Brűnn, 4, 3–47, (Read at the meetings of February 8th, and March 8th, 1865; in English translation at mendelweb.org).

  • Morange, M. 2014. Genome as a multipurpose structure built by evolution. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 57: 162–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, T.H. 1934. Embryology and genetics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Mary Jo. 2011. Michael Polanyi and his generation: Origins of the social construction of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peter, I.S., E. Faure, and E.H. Davidson. 2012. Predictive computation of genomic logic processing functions in embryonic development. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences USA 109: 16434–16442. doi:10.1073/pnas.1207852109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M. 2009. The end of theory in science? EMBO Reports 10: 534. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. [1958] 1962. Personal knowledge – towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1963. The potential theory of adsorption. Science. 141: 1010–1013. doi:10.1126/science.141.3585.1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1966. The tacit dimension. Garden City: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. [1959] 2002. The logic of scientific discovery. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, E.V. 2016. Eric Davidson: Steps to a gene regulatory network for development. Developmental Biology 412: S7–S19. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2016.01.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, Douglas.1994. Herbert Simon on the mind in the machine. http://www.omnimagazine.com/archives/interviews/simon/index.html. Accessed 23 Nov 2016.

  • Snyder, Laura J. 2012. “William Whewell”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Winter 2012 Edition. ed. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/whewell/. Accessed 23 Nov 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgement

I thank Mary Jo Nye for her valuable comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ute Deichmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Deichmann, U. (2017). Francis Bacon, Karl Popper, Michael Polanyi, and Modern Experimental Biology. In: Bar-Am, N., Gattei, S. (eds) Encouraging Openness. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 325. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57669-5_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics