David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Acta Biotheoretica 55 (4):317-340 (2007)
Homology is among the most important comparative concepts in biology. Today, the evolutionary reinterpretation of homology is usually conceived of as the most important event in the development of the concept. This paradigmatic turning point, however important for the historical explanation of life, is not of crucial importance for the development of the concept of homology itself. In the broadest sense, homology can be understood as sameness in reference to the universal guarantor so that in this sense the different concepts of homology show a certain kind of “metahomology”. This holds in the old morphological conception, as well as in the evolutionary usage of homology. Depending on what is (or was) taken as a guarantor, different types of homology may be distinguished (as idealistic, historical, developmental etc.). This study represents a historical overview of the development of the homology concept followed by some clues on how to navigate the pluralistic terminology of modern approaches to homology.
|Keywords||Philosophy Evolutionary Biology Philosophy of Biology|
|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
Karel Kleisner (forthcoming). Semantic Organs: The Concept and Its Theoretical Ramifications. Biosemiotics:1-13.
Karel Kleisner (2008). The Semantic Morphology of Adolf Portmann: A Starting Point for the Biosemiotics of Organic Form? [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 1 (2):207-219.
Karel Kleisner (2011). Perceive, Co-Opt, Modify, and Live! Organism as a Centre of Experience. Biosemiotics 4 (2):223-241.
Radim Kočandrle & Karel Kleisner (2013). Evolution Born of Moisture: Analogies and Parallels Between Anaximander's Ideas on Origin of Life and Man and Later Pre-Darwinian and Darwinian Evolutionary Concepts. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 46 (1):103-124.
Similar books and articles
Ingo Brigandt (2006). Homology and Heterochrony: The Evolutionary Embryologist Gavin Rylands de Beer (1899-1972). Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular and Developmental Evolution) 306:317–328.
Ingo Brigandt (2003). Homology in Comparative, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology: The Radiation of a Concept. Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular and Developmental Evolution) 299:9-17.
Bruce A. Young (1993). On the Necessity of an Archetypal Concept in Morphology: With Special Reference to the Concepts of “Structure” and “Homology”. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 8 (2):225-248.
Marc Ereshefsky (2012). Homology Thinking. Biology and Philosophy 27 (3):381-400.
Ingo Brigandt (2002). Homology and the Origin of Correspondence. Biology and Philosophy 17 (3):389–407.
Claudia Lorena García (2010). Functional Homology and Functional Variation in Evolutionary Cognitive Science. Biological Theory 5 (2):124-135.
Francisco Aboitiz (1988). Homology: A Comparative or a Historical Concept? Acta Biotheoretica 37 (1):27-29.
Paul E. Griffiths (2007). The Phenomena of Homology. Biology and Philosophy 22 (5):643-658.
Heather Jamniczky (2005). Biological Pluralism and Homology. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):687-698.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads21 ( #134,721 of 1,724,888 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #268,597 of 1,724,888 )
How can I increase my downloads?