David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):75-91 (2004)
Alexander Rosenberg recently claimed (1997) that developmental biology is currently being reduced to molecular biology. cite several concrete biological examples that are intended to impugn Rosenberg's claim. I first argue that although Laubichler and Wagner's examples would refute a very strong reductionism, a more moderate reductionism would escape their attacks. Next, taking my cue from the antireductionist's perennial stress on the importance of spatial organization, I describe one form an empirical finding that refutes this moderate reductionism would take. Finally, I point out an actual example, anterior-posterior axis determination in the chick, that challenges the reductionist's belief that all developmental regularities can be explained by molecular biology. In short, I argue that Rosenberg's position can be saved from Laubichler and Wagner's criticisms and putative counter-examples, but it would not survive a different kind of counter-example.
|Keywords||Developmental biology Molecular biology Reductionism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Marco J. Nathan (2012). The Varieties of Molecular Explanation. Philosophy of Science 79 (2):233-254.
Similar books and articles
Marc Ereshefsky (2009). Homology: Integrating Phylogeny and Development. Biological Theory 4 (3):225-229.
Alexander Rosenberg (2006). Darwinian Reductionism, or, How to Stop Worrying and Love Molecular Biology. University of Chicago Press.
Alex Rosenberg (1997). Reductionism Redux: Computing the Embryo. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):445-470.
Manfred D. Laubichler (2007). Evolutionary Developmental Biology. In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press
Manfred D. Laubichler (2010). Evolutionary Developmental Biology Offers a Significant Challenge to the Neo-Darwinian Paradigm. In Francisco José Ayala & Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology. Wiley-Blackwell Pub.
Alexander Rosenberg (1985). The Structure of Biological Science. Cambridge University Press.
Joseph D. Robinson (1992). Aims and Achievements of the Reductionist Approach in Biochemistry/Molecular Biology/Cell Biology: A Response to Kincaid. Philosophy of Science 59 (3):465-470.
Daniel Steel (2004). Can a Reductionist Be a Pluralist? Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):55-73.
Stavros Ioannidis (2008). How Development Changes Evolution: Conceptual and Historical Issues in Evolutionary Developmental Biology. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):567-578.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #134,409 of 1,790,294 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #429,817 of 1,790,294 )
How can I increase my downloads?