David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 67 (3):86 (2000)
Two decades of critique have sensitized historians and philosophers of science to the inadequacies of conventional dichotomies between theory and practice, thereby prompting the search for new ways of writing about science that are less beholden than the old ways to the epistemological mores of theoretical physics, and more faithful to the actual practices not only of physics but of all the natural sciences. The need for alternative descriptions seems particularly urgent if one is to understand the place of theory (and, in parallel, the role of modeling) in contemporary molecular biology, a science where, until now, no division between theory and experiment has obtained, and where distinctions between representing and intervening, and more generally, between basic and applied science, are daily becoming more blurred. Indeed, the very division between theory and experiment threatens to slight the extensive and sophisticated theoretical analyses (and even modeling) on which experimental work in contemporary molecular biology so often depends. My aim in this paper is to find a way of talking about theoretical practices in biology that is directly rooted in the mix of conceptual and material work that biologists do. As an example of such theoretical practices, I choose for the focus of my analysis the development of a model for gene regulation out of the experimental work of Eric Davidson and his colleagues at Cal Tech
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Rachel A. Ankeny & Sabina Leonelli (2011). What's so Special About Model Organisms? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (2):313-323.
Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent, Sacha Loeve, Alfred Nordmann & Astrid Schwarz (2011). Matters of Interest: The Objects of Research in Science and Technoscience. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 42 (2):365-383.
Giovanni Boniolo, Marcello D’Agostino, Mario Piazza & Gabriele Pulcini (2015). Adding Logic to the Toolbox of Molecular Biology. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 5 (3):399-417.
Mary Evelyn Sunderland (2010). Regeneration: Thomas Hunt Morgan's Window Into Development. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 43 (2):325 - 361.
Mary Evelyn Sunderland (2011). Morphogenesis, Dictyostelium, and the Search for Shared Developmental Processes. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 42 (4):508-517.
Similar books and articles
Eckhart Arnold, Tools of Toys? On Specific Challenges for Modeling and the Epistemology of Models and Computer Simulations in the Social Sciences.
Lionel G. Harrison (2005). Kinetic Theory of Living Pattern. Cambridge University Press.
James R. Griesemer (1990). Modeling in the Museum: On the Role of Remnant Models in the Work of Joseph Grinnell. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 5 (1):3-36.
James R. Griesemer (1990). Material Models in Biology. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:79 - 93.
Sylvia Culp & Philip Kitcher (1989). Theory Structure and Theory Change in Contemporary Molecular Biology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 40 (4):459-483.
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2009). Models in Biology and Physics: What's the Difference? Foundations of Science 14 (4):281-294.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads118 ( #23,615 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #66,646 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?