Abstract
If a reliable set of procedures for the discovery and evaluation of knowledge existed — that is, if there were a single, efficacious scientific method — then the history of science would be complete. The growth of science would be the result of an unfolding, its future course predicted at the moment the method was discovered. But for anyone who understands that scientific thought and action are historically determined, for anyone who believes that scientific thought, like any other thought, is relative to time and social context, such a position seems wildly implausible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For discussions of the symmetrical approach see the relevant essays in Karin D. Knorr–Cetina and Michael Mulkay (eds.), Science Observed (London, 1983 ).
W. Coleman, ’Bateson and Chromosomes: Conservative Thought in Science1, CentaurusXV, 1970, pp. 228–314. See also Allen, op. cit. (Note 2 ), p. 57.
Pierre Bourdieu, ‘The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions for the Progress of Reason’, Social Science Information VI, 1975, pp. 19 — 47.
J. Maynard Smith, ‘Evolution and Development’, in Development and Evolution. Symposium of the British Society for Developmental Biology (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 33–45, at p. 39.
T.H.Morgan, The Physical Basis of Heredity (New York, 1919), p. 241.8 T. H. Morgan, ‘Genetics and the Physiology of Development’, The American Naturalist LX, 1926, pp. 489–515, at p. 491.
E. M. East, ‘The Nucleus-Plasma Problem’, The American Naturalist LXVIII, 1934, pp. 289–303; 402–439.
Carl Lindegren, The Yeast Cell, Its Genetics and Cytology ( St. Louis, 1949 ), p. 27.
W. Beadle, ‘Genes and Biological Enigmas’, Science in Progress, 6th series, G. Baitsell (ed.), ( New Haven, 1948 ), pp. 232–233.
M. Delbriick, discussion following David Bonner, ‘Biochemical Mutations in Neurospora’, Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology XI, 1946, pp. 14–24, at p. 23.
Boris Ephrussi, Nucleo-Cytoplasmic Relations in Micro–organisms (Oxford, 1953), p. 121.
T. M. Sonneborn, ‘Beyond the Gene-Two Years Later’, Science in Progress, 1951, 7th Series, pp. 167–203, at p. 199.
B. Ephrussi, ‘Remarks on Cell Heredity’, in L. C. Dunn (ed.), op. cit. (Note 43), pp. 241–262, at p. 242.
D. L. Nanney, ‘The Role of the Cytoplasm in Heredity’, in W. D. McElroy and H. B. Glass (eds.), The Chemical Basis of Heredity (Baltimore, 1957), pp. 134—166, at pp. 137–138.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1986 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sapp, J. (1986). Inside the Cell: Genetic Methodology and the Case of the Cytoplasm. In: Schuster, J.A., Yeo, R.R. (eds) The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method. Australasian Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4560-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4560-9_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8527-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-4560-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive