Graduate studies at Western
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (4):411-427 (2011)
|Abstract||Kenneth Waters and Marcel Weber argue that the joint use of distinct gene concepts and the transfer of knowledge between classical and molecular analyses in contemporary scientific practice is possible because classical and molecular concepts of the gene refer to overlapping chromosomal segments and the DNA sequences associated with these segments. However, while pointing in the direction of coreference, both authors also agree that there is a considerable divergence between the actual sequences that count as genes in classical genetics and molecular biology. The thesis advanced in this paper is that the referents of classical and molecular gene concepts are coextensive to a higher degree than admitted by Waters and Weber, and therefore coreference can provide a satisfactory account of the high level of integration between classical genetics and molecular biology. In particular, I argue that the functional units/cistrons identified by classical techniques overlap with functional elements entering the composition of molecular transcription units, and that the precision of this overlap can be improved by conducting further experimentation|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
C. Kenneth Waters (1994). Genes Made Molecular. Philosophy of Science 61 (2):163-185.
Marianne Boenink (2009). Tensions and Opportunities in Convergence: Shifting Concepts of Disease in Emerging Molecular Medicine. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 3 (3):243-255.
Tudor M. Baetu (2011). A Defense of Syntax-Based Gene Concepts in Postgenomics: Genes as Modular Subroutines in the Master Genomic Program. Philosophy of Science 78 (5):712-723.
Lenny Moss (2006). The Question of Questions: What is a Gene? Comments on Rolston and Griffths & Stotz. [REVIEW] Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (6):523-534.
Karola Stotz & Paul Griffiths (2004). Genes: Philosophical Analyses Put to the Test. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 26 (1):5 - 28.
Thomas Fogle (1990). Are Genes Units of Inheritance? Biology and Philosophy 5 (3):349-371.
Richard Burian (2004). Molecular Epigenesis, Molecular Pleiotropy, and Molecular Gene Definitions. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 26 (1):59 - 80.
Ingo Brigandt (2010). The Epistemic Goal of a Concept: Accounting for the Rationality of Semantic Change and Variation. Synthese 177 (1):19-40.
Tudor Baetu (forthcoming). Mechanism Schemas and the Relationship Between Biological Theories. In J. Williamson P. McKay (ed.), Causality in the Sciences.
Peter J. Beurton, Raphael Falk & Hans-Jörg Rheinberger (eds.) (2000). The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution: Historical and Epistemological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
Ingo Brigandt (2006). A Theory of Conceptual Advance: Explaining Conceptual Change in Evolutionary, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
Tudor Baetu (2012). Emergence, Therefore Antireductionism? A Critique of Emergent Antireductionism. Biology and Philosophy 27 (3):433-448.
Rosario M. Piro (2011). Are All Genes Regulatory Genes? Biology and Philosophy 26 (4):595-602.
Nino B. Cocchiarella (1998). Reference in Conceptual Realism. Synthese 114 (2):169-202.
Degeng Wang (2005). “Molecular Gene”: Interpretation in the Right Context. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):453-464.
Added to index2011-02-19
Total downloads22 ( #62,772 of 739,542 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,542 )
How can I increase my downloads?