Realism and Biological Knowledge

  • Jean Gayon
Part of the The Frontiers Collection book series (FRONTCOLL)


Biology may be able to modify philosophers’ views of the question of realism in science. Two classical notions of realism are considered: “scientific realism” (which assume the objective reality of theoretical entities), and the metaphysical thesis of the independent reality of the world. The realism of theoretical entities, which is a modern version of the “realism of universals”, is rendered problematic by the extreme difficulty these sciences face in constructing laws out of their generalisations, and thus their difficulty in identifying natural kinds. The category of scientific realism raises particular problems in the case of the biological sciences: a science that is confronted throughout its range by the historical singularity of its objects. On the other hand, modern biology, and particularly evolutionary biology, provides some strong arguments that pose a problem for realism as a postulate of an independent external world: we are not pure intelligences. In a biological perspective, and more especially in an evolutionary perspective, what matters is not an independent world, but a surrounding world. This suggests that the goal of this mode of knowledge is to construct intelligible models that can respond to the complexity of the human environment, rather than to construct a global and unified image of the world.


Biological Science Natural Kind Deductive System Biological Knowledge Scientific Realism 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bachelard, Gaston (1931–32), “Noumène et microphysique,” Recherches philosophiques, vol. 1, pp. 55–65 [Reproduit dans Gaston Bachelard (1970, pp. 11–24)].Google Scholar
  2. Bachelard, Gaston (1970), Etudes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Beatty, John (1995), “The evolutionary contingency thesis.” In: Wolters/Lennox (eds.; 1995 ), pp. 45–106.Google Scholar
  3. Carrier, Martin (1995), “Evolutionary Change and Lawlikeness: Beatty on Biological Generalizations.” In: Wolters/Lennox (eds.; 1995 ), pp. 83–97.Google Scholar
  4. Carrier, Martin, Johannes Roggenhofer, Günter Küppers, and Philippe Blanchard (2001), preliminary presentation of “Journées scientifiques au ZIF: Monde et savoir; à propos de la construction des savoirs scientifiques—L’objet et but de la réunion” (18–20 juin 2001, Bielefeld) (French; my translation).Google Scholar
  5. Cosmides, Leda and John Tooby (1987), “From Evolution to Behavior: Evolutionary Psychology as the Missing Link ” In: DUPRÉ (ed.; 1987 ), pp. 277–306.Google Scholar
  6. Cunningham, Suzan (1996), Philosophy and the Darwinian Legacy. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dancy, Jonathan and Ernest Sosa (1992), A Companion to Epistemology. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Dupré, John (ed.; 1987 ), The Latest on the Best: Essays on Evolution ad Optimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gibson, James J. (1979), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  10. Grene, Marjorie (1995), A Philosophical Testament. Chicago: Open Court. Gayon, Jean (1993), “La biologie entre loi et histoire, ” Philosophie vol. 38, pp. 30–57.Google Scholar
  11. Heelan, Patrick A. (1990), “réalisme (néo-),” Encyclopédie philosophique universelle, vol. 2. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France I I.Google Scholar
  12. Hull, David (1974), The Philosophy of Biological Science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Hull, David (1978), “A Matter of Individuality,” philosopy of Science, vol. 45, pp. 335–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hume, David (1910), An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. New York: P. F. Collier Son [Harvard Classics, vol. 37; First published in 1748 ].Google Scholar
  15. Pettit, Phillip (1992), “Realism.” In: Dancy/Sosa (eds.; 1992 ),pp. 420–424.Google Scholar
  16. Piaget, Jean (1950), Introduction à l’épistémologie génétique, vol. 3, La Pensée biologique, la pensée psychologique et la pensée sociologique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  17. Rosenberg, Alexander (1994), Instrumental Biology or the Disunity of Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Russell, Bertrand (21926), Our Knowledge of the External World. London, Allen Unwin.Google Scholar
  19. Smart, John J. C. (1963), Philosophy and Scientific Realism. New York: The Humanities Press.190 Jean GayonGoogle Scholar
  20. Sober, Elliott (1984), The Nature of Selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Wolters, Gereon and James G. Lennox (eds.; 1995 ), Concepts, Theories, and Rationality in the Biological Sciences. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag KonstanzGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Gayon

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations