Abstract
T. H. Morgan (1866–1945), the founder of the Drosophila research group in genetics that established the chromosome theory of Mendelian inheritance, has been described as a radical empiricist in the historical literature. His empiricism, furthermore, is supposed to have prejudiced him against certain scientific conclusions. This paper aims to show two things: first, that the sense in which the term “empiricism” has been used by scholars is too weak to be illuminating. It is necessary to distinguish between empiricism as an epistemological position and the so-called “methodological” empiricism. I will argue that the way the latter has been presented cannot distinguish an empiricist methodology from a non-empiricist one. Second, I will show that T. H. Morgan was not an epistemological empiricist as this term is usually defined in philosophy. The reason is that he believed in the existence of genes as material entities when they were unobservable entities when they were unobservable entities introduced to account for the phenotypic ratios found in breeding experiments. These two points, of course, are interrelated. If we were to water down the meaning of empiricis, perhaps we could call Morgan an empiricist. But then we would also fail to distinguish empiricism from realism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, G. E.: 1966, ‘Thomas Hunt Morgan and the Problem of Sex Determination’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 110, 48–57.
Allen, G. E.: 1968, ‘Thomas Hunt Morgan and the Problem of Natural Selection’, Journal of the History of Biology 1, 113–139.
Allen, G. E.: 1978, Thomas Hunt Morgan and His Science, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Allen, G. E.: 1985, ‘Thomas Hunt Morgan et la naissance de la genetique moderne’, La Recherche 16, 592–599.
Allen, G. E.: 1986, ‘Thomas Hunt Morgan and the Split between Embryology and Genetics, 1910–35’, in T. J. Horder, J. A. Witkowski and C. C. Wylie (eds.), A History of Embryology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1910–1935.
Bateson, W.: 1916, ‘Review of The Mechanism Heredity. By T. H. Morgan, A. H. Sturtevant, H. J. Muller, and C. B. Bridges’, Science 44, 536–543.
Bridges, C. B.: 1914, ‘Direct Proof through Non-Disjunction that the Sex-Linked Genes of Drosophila Are Borne by the X-Chromosome’, Science 40, 107–109.
Bridges, C. B.: 1916, ‘Non-Disjunction as Proof of the Chromosome Theory of Heredity’, Genetics 1, 1–52; 107–163.
Burian, R. M.: 1985, ‘On Conceptual Change in Biology: The Case of the Gene’, in Depew and Weber (eds.), Evolution at a Crossroads, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Burian, R. M.: 1987, ‘Realist Methodology in Contemporary Genetics’, in N. J. Nersessian (ed.), The Process of Science, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp. 195–210.
Carlson, E. A.: 1966, The Gene: a Critical History, Saunders, Philadelphia.
Carlson, E. A.: 1974, ‘The Drosophila Group: The Transition from the Mendelian Unit to the Individual Gene’, Journal of the History of Biology 7, 31–48.
Churchill, F. B.: 1970, ‘Hertwig, Weismann and the Meaning of Reduction Division circa 1980’, Isis 61, 429–457.
Churchill, F. B.: 1987, ‘From Heredity Theory to Vererbung, The Transmission Problem, 1850–1915’, Isis 78, 337–364.
Coleman, W.: 1965, ‘Cell, Nucleus, and Inheritance: A Historical Study’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 109, 124–158.
Coleman, W.: 1970, ‘Bateson and Chromosomes: Conservative Thought in Science’, Centaurus 15, 228–314.
Darden, L.: 1977, ‘William Bateson and the Promise of Mendelism’, Journal of the History of Biology 10, 87–106.
Darden, L.: 1980a, ‘Theory Construction in Genetics’, in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery: Case Studies, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 151–170.
Darden, L.: 1980b, ‘Review of Garland Allen's Thomas Hunt Morgan, The Man and His Science’, Philosophy of Science 47, 662–666.
Darden, L.: 1982, ‘Aspects of Theory Construction in Biology’, in Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, North Holland Publishing Co., Hannover, pp. 463–477.
Darden, L. and N. Maull: 1977, ‘Interfield Theories’, Philosophy of Science 44, 43–64.
Dunn, L. C.: 1927, ‘The Theory of the Gene. A Review’, Journal of Heredity 18, 22–24.
Dunn, L. C.: 1932, Heredity and Variation, The University Society, New York.
Falk, R.: 1986, ‘What Is a Gene?’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 17, 133–173.
Gilbert, S. F.: 1978, ‘The Embryological Origins of the Gene Theory’, Journal of the History of Biology 11, 307–351.
Hooker, C. A.: 1977, ‘Methodology and Systematic Philosophy’, in R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds.), Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 3–23.
Janssens, F. A.: 1909, ‘La théorie de la chiasmatypie: Nouvelle interprétation des Cinèses de maturation’, Cellule 25, 389–406.
Lederman, M.: 1989, ‘Research Note: Genes on Chromosomes. The Conversion of Thomas Hunt Morgan’, Journal of the History of Biology 22, 163–176.
Maienschein, J.: 1981, ‘Shifting Assumptions in American Biology: Embryology 1890–1910’, Journal of the History of Biology 14, 89–113.
Mayr, E.: 1982, The Growth of Biological Thought, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
McClung, C. E.: 1927, ‘The Chiasmatype Theory of Janssens’, Quarterly Review of Biology 2, 344–366.
Metz, C. W.: 1925, ‘The Cellular Basis of Inheritance’, Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 13, 26–36.
Mendel, G.: 1865, ‘Versuche ueber Pflanzen-Hybriden’, Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines IV, Brunn, 1–47.
Morgan, T. H.: 1909, ‘What are “Factors” in Mendelian Explanations?’, Proceedings American Breeder's Association 5, 365–368.
Morgan, T. H.: 1910a, ‘Sex Limited Inheritance in Drosophila’, Science 32, 120–122.
Morgan, T. H.: 1910b, ‘Chromosomes and Heredity’, The American Naturalist 44, 449–496.
Morgan, T. H.: 1911a, ‘Random Segregation versus Coupling in Mendelian Inheritance’, Science 34, 384.
Morgan, T. H.: 1911b, ‘An Attempt to Analyze the Constitution of the Chromosomes on the Basis of Sex-Limited Inheritance in Drosophila’, Journal of Experimental Zoology 11, 365–413.
Morgan, T. H.: 1913a, ‘Factors and Unit Characters in Mendelian Heredity’, The American Naturalist 47, 5–16.
Morgan, T. H.: 1913b, ‘Simplicity versus Adequacy in Mendelian Formulae’, The American Naturalist 47, 372–374.
Morgan, T. H.: 1915a, ‘The Constitution of the Hereditary Material’, American Philosophical Society Proceedings 54, 143–153.
Morgan, T. H.: 1915b, ‘Localization of the Hereditary Material in the Germ Cells’, National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings 1, 420–429.
Morgan, T. H.: 1917, ‘The Theory of the Gene’, The American Naturalist, 1, 420–429.
Morgan, T. H.: 1917, ‘The Theory of the gene’, The American Naturalist, 51, 513–544.
Morgan, T. H.: 1919, The Physical Basis of Heredity, J. L. Lippincott, Philadelphia and London.
Morgan, T. H.: 1923, ‘On the Mechanism of Heredity’, Royal Society of London, Proceedings B XCIV, 162–197.
Morgan, T. H.: 1962a, ‘Recent Results Relating to Chromosomes and Genetics’, Quarter;u Review of Biology 1, 186–211.
Morgan, T. H.: 1926b, The Theory of the Gene, Yalle Univ. Press, New Haven.
Morgan, T. H.: 1932, ‘The Rise of Genetics’, Science 76, 261–288.
Morgan, T. H.: 1935, ‘The Relation of Genetics to Physiology and Medicine’, The Scientific Monthly 41, 5–18.
Morgan, T. H., A. H. Sturtevant, H. J. Muller and C. B. Bridges: 1915, The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity, Henry Holt,New York.
Ravin, A. W.: 1977, ‘The Gene as Catalyst; The Gene as Organism’, Studies in History of Biology 1, 1–45.
Shine, I. and S. Wrobel: 1976, Thomas Hunt Morgan, Pioneer of Genetics, University of Kentucky Press, Kentucky.
Shull, G. H.: 1928, ‘Oenothera Cytology in Relation to Genetics’, The American Naturalist 62, 97–114.
Spillman, W.J.: 1912, ‘The Present Status of the Genetics Problem’, Science 35, 757–767.
Stern, C.: 1927, ‘Die Genetische Analyse der Chromosomen’ Die Naturwissenschaften 22, 465–473.
Stern, C.: 1928, ‘Fortschritte der Chromosomentheorie der Vererbung’, in K. von Frisch, R. Goldschmidt, W. Ruhland, and H. Winterstein (eds.), Ergebnisse der Biologie, Julius Springer, Berlin, pp. 205–359.
Sturtevant, A. H.: 1965, A History of Genetics, Harper & Row, New York.
Sutton, W. S.: 1903, ‘The Chromosomes in Heredity’, Biol. Bull. Mar. Biol. Lab., Woods Hole 4, 231–248.
Van Balen, G.: 1987, ‘Conceptual Tensions between Theory and Program: The Chromosome and the Mendelian Research Program’, Biology and Philosophy 2, 435–461.
Van Fraasen, B. C.: 1985, ‘Empiricicm in the Philosophy of Science”, in P. M. Churchland and C. A. Hooker (eds.), Images of Science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism, with A Reply by Bas C. van Fraasen, University of Chicago Press,Chicago.
Vicedo, M.: 1989a, ‘Realism and Simplicity in the Castle-East Debate on the Stability of the Hereditary Units: Rhetorical Devices versus Substantive Methodology’, to appear in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science.
Vicedo, M.: 1889b, ‘Catching and Cooking Genes: The Birth of Cytogenics' (manuscript).
Vicedo, M.: 1989c, ‘Discussion: Methodological and Epistemological Realism’ (manuscript).
Wilson, E. B., 1914, ‘The Bearing of the Cytological Research on Heredity’, Royal Society of London, Proceedings B 88, 333–352.
Whitehouse, H. L. K>: 1973, Towards an Understanding of the Mechanism of Heredity, 3rd ed., Edward Arnold, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vicedo, M. T.H. Morgan, neither an epistemological empiricist nor a “Methodological” empiricist. Biol Philos 5, 293–311 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165255
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165255