David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:179 - 191 (1990)
This paper examines the process that led to the identification of chromosomes as carriers of genes. It focuses on the role played by explanations in theory construction and analyzes the status given to the entities and processes introduced through such explanations. I argue that the theory of the gene was a functional explanation that, as such, could not offer decisive support for the existence of genes. However, I maintain that functional explanations set the conditions of identification needed to discover the physical structure that has a certain function in a given system. In this case, the theory of the gene helped to select the chromosomes as the physical structure responsible for the Mendelian segregation of genes. In its turn, the theory of chromosome inheritance helped to reduce the permissive character of the theory of the gene, regulating its further development.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Gerrit Balen (1987). Conceptual Tensions Between Theory and Program: The Chromosome Theory and the Mendelian Research Program. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 2 (4):435-461.
Stephen G. Brush (2002). How Theories Became Knowledge: Morgan's Chromosome Theory of Heredity in America and Britain. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 35 (3):471-535.
Marga Vicedo (1990). T.H. Morgan, Neither an Epistemological Empiricist nor a “Methodological” Empiricist. Biology and Philosophy 5 (3):293-311.
G. A. Cohen (1982). Functional Explanation, Consequence Explanation, and Marxism. Inquiry 25 (1):27 – 56.
Holmes Rolston (2006). What is a Gene? From Molecules to Metaphysics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (6):471-497.
Matteo Mameli (2005). The Inheritance of Features. Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):365-399.
Ehud Lamm, Inheritance Systems. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition).
Garland E. Allen (1974). Opposition to the Mendelian-Chromosome Theory: The Physiological and Developmental Genetics of Richard Goldschmidt. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 7 (1):49 - 92.
Raphael Falk (2003). Linkage: From Particulate to Interactive Genetics. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 36 (1):87 - 117.
Jeroen de Ridder (2006). The (Alleged) Inherent Normativity of Technological Explanations. Techne 10 (1):79-94.
Francesca Merlin (2009). On Griffiths and Gray's Concept of Expanded and Diffused Inheritance. Biological Theory 5 (3):206-215.
Carla E. Kary (1982). Can Darwinian Inheritance Be Extended From Biology to Epistemology? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:356 - 369.
Charles B. Cross (1991). Explanation and the Theory of Questions. Erkenntnis 34 (2):237 - 260.
Francisco Flores (1999). Einstein's Theory of Theories and Types of Theoretical Explanation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (2):123 – 134.
D. Turner (2000). The Functions of Fossils: Inference and Explanation in Functional Morphology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 31 (1):193-212.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads3 ( #514,048 of 1,777,935 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #291,290 of 1,777,935 )
How can I increase my downloads?