Redundancy, Plasticity, and Detachment: The Implications of Comparative Genomics for Evolutionary Thinking
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 73 (5):930-946 (2006)
Radically new or unexpected findings in a science demand an openness to new concepts and styles of explanation. The time is more than ripe for asking ourselves what we have learned from the research program of comparative genomics. Where not long ago the human genome was expected to reveal a close association of complexity with the quantitative expansion of the roster of unique genes, more recent findings, especially in relation to comparisons between human and chimp, have raised the bracing possibility that when it comes to complexity, it may be that `less is more'. But `less is more' is not the only observation or inference that follows from the data. The idea of `progressive detachment' will be introduced and set forth as the most perspicuous conceptual resource for unifying and interpreting the overall findings from comparative genomics to date.
|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
Marjorie Grene (2004). The Philosophy of Biology: An Episodic History. Cambridge University Press.
John S. Mattick (2003). Challenging the Dogma: The Hidden Layer of Non-Protein-Coding RNAs in Complex Organisms. Bioessays 25 (10):930-939.
Maureen A. O'Malley & John Dupré (2005). Fundamental Issues in Systems Biology. Bioessays 27 (12):1270-1276.
Citations of this work BETA
Kepa Ruiz-Mirazo & Alvaro Moreno (2012). Autonomy in Evolution: From Minimal to Complex Life. Synthese 185 (1):21-52.
Laura Perini (2011). Sequence Matters: Genomic Research and the Gene Concept. Philosophy of Science 78 (5):752-762.
Similar books and articles
Bjørn Hofmann, Anne Myhr & Søren Holm (2013). Scientific Dishonesty—a Nationwide Survey of Doctoral Students in Norway. BMC Medical Ethics 14 (1):1-9.
M. Ruiz-Canela, J. I. Valle-Mansilla & D. P. Sulmasy (2009). Researchers' Preferences and Attitudes on Ethical Aspects of Genomics Research: A Comparative Study Between the USA and Spain. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (4):251-257.
Ruth Chadwick & Sarah Wilson (2004). Genomic Databases as Global Public Goods? Res Publica 10 (2):123-134.
Herman T. Tavani (2004). Genomic Research and Data-Mining Technology: Implications for Personal Privacy and Informed Consent. Ethics and Information Technology 6 (1):15-28.
Catherine Kendig, Reconstructing the Concept of Homology for Genomics. Pittsburgh/London Colloquium on Philosophy of Biology and Neuroscience, University of London. Online at PhilSci Archive.
John Dupré (2004). Understanding Contemporary Genomics. Perspectives on Science 12 (3):320-338.
Richard Brooks, The Cultivation of Cosmopolitan Detachment in Comparative Law: The Hellenistic Contributions.
Marko Barendregt & René Van Hezewijk (2005). Adaptive and Genomic Explanations of Human Behaviour: Might Evolutionary Psychology Contribute to Behavioural Genomics? [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 20 (1):57-78.
Lenny Moss (2006). Redundancy, Plasticity, and Detachment: The Implications of Comparative Genomics for Evolutionary Thinking. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):930-946.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #108,272 of 1,413,409 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #51,624 of 1,413,409 )
How can I increase my downloads?