On the necessity of an archetypal concept in morphology: With special reference to the concepts of “structure” and “homology” [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 8 (2):225-248 (1993)
Morphological elements, or structures, are sorted into four categories depending on their level of anatomical isolation and the presence or absence of intrinsically identifying characteristics. These four categories are used to highlight the difficulties with the concept of structure and our ability to identify or define structures. The analysis is extended to the concept of homology through a discussion of the methodological and philosophical problems of the current concept of homology. It is argued that homology is fundamentally a similarity based concept rather than a phylogenetic concept, and a proposal is put forth to return to a comparative context for homology. It is shown that for both the concepts of structure and homology ana priori assumption of stable underlying patterns (i.e. archetypes) is essential.
|Keywords||Archetype morphology homology|
|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
Charles Darwin (2008). On the Origin of Species. Oxford University Press.
Ernst Mayr (1963). Animal Species and Evolution. Belknap of Harvard University Press.
Jean Piaget (1970). Structuralism. New York,Basic Books.
Michael Ghiselin (1987). Species Concepts, Individuality, and Objectivity. Biology and Philosophy 2 (2):127-43.
Citations of this work BETA
Daniel J. Nicholson & Richard Gawne (2014). Rethinking Woodger's Legacy in the Philosophy of Biology. Journal of the History of Biology 47 (2):243-292.
Miles MacLeod (2011). How to Compare Homology Concepts: Class Reasoning About Evolution and Morphology in Phylogenetics and Developmental Biology. Biological Theory 6 (2):141-153.
Alan C. Love (2005). The Return of the Embryo. Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):567-584.
Similar books and articles
Claudia Lorena García (2010). Functional Homology and Functional Variation in Evolutionary Cognitive Science. Biological Theory 5 (2):124-135.
Ingo Brigandt (2006). A Theory of Conceptual Advance: Explaining Conceptual Change in Evolutionary, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
Ingo Brigandt (2002). Homology and the Origin of Correspondence. Biology and Philosophy 17 (3):389–407.
Brian Goodwin (1993). Homology and a Generative Theory of Biological Form. Acta Biotheoretica 41 (4):305-314.
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.
Francisco Aboitiz (1988). Homology: A Comparative or a Historical Concept? Acta Biotheoretica 37 (1):27-29.
Heather Jamniczky (2005). Biological Pluralism and Homology. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):687-698.
Karel Kleisner (2007). The Formation of the Theory of Homology in Biological Sciences. Acta Biotheoretica 55 (4):317-340.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #120,994 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #183,615 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?