9 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Kelly Smith (Clemson University)
Profile: Barbara Hamberg (Clemson University)
  1. Kelly C. Smith & Hardin Hall, Scientific Contribution.
      What exactly is a genetic disease? For a phrase one hears on a daily basis, there has been surprisingly little analysis of the underlying concept. Medical doctors seem perfectly willing to admit that the etiology of disease is typically complex, with a great many factors interacting to bring about a given condition. On such a view, descriptions of diseases like cancer as genetic seem at best highly simplistic, and at worst philosophically indefensible. On the other hand, there is (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Kelly C. Smith, Genetic Disease, Genetic Testing and the Clinician.
    Modern medicine emphasizes treatment of the sick. It is often said that the widespread genetic testing soon to follow the completion of the Human Genome Project will usher in a new era of preventive medicine. Such changes require new ways of thinking, however. For example, there may be nothing clinically wrong with a healthy patient who requests genetic testing, even if the tests reveal disease genes. Since all individuals have genetic skeletons in their closets, it is important to be careful (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Kelly C. Smith, Lightsey Fellowship Proposal for Summer 2000.
    Proposal in Brief : I have been invited by Michael Ruse, editor of the Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Biology series for Cambridge University Press, to submit a book proposal on the Philosophy of Developmental Biology. This is both a great honor and a magnificent opportunity for a relatively junior professor, especially since the field is new - done well, this book could help set the basic parameters of an emerging discipline.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Kelly C. Smith (2011). Foiling the Black Knight. Synthese 178 (2):219 - 235.
    Why is the academy in general, and philosophy in particular, not more involved in the fight against the creationist threat? And why, when a response is offered, is it so curiously ineffective? I argue, by using an analogy with the battle against the Black Knight from the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, that the difficulty lies largely in a failure to see the nature of the problem clearly. By modifying the analogy, it is possible to see both why (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Kelly C. Smith (2009). The Trouble with Intrinsic Value : An Ethical Primer for Astrobiology. In Constance M. Bertka (ed.), Exploring the Origin, Extent, and Future of Life: Philosophical, Ethical, and Theological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Kelly C. Smith (2001). A Disease by Any Other Name: Musings on the Concept of a Genetic Disease. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (1):19-30.
    What exactly is a genetic disease? For a phrase one hears on a daily basis, there has been surprisingly little analysis of the underlying concept. Medical doctors seem perfectly willing to admit that the etiology of disease is typically complex, with a great many factors interacting to bring about a given condition. On such a view, descriptions of diseases like cancer as geneticseem at best highly simplistic, and at worst philosophically indefensible. On the other hand, there is clearly some practical (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Kim Sterelny, Kelly C. Smith & Michael Dickison (1996). The Extended Replicator. Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):377-403.
    This paper evaluates and criticises the developmental systems conception of evolution and develops instead an extension of the gene's eye conception of evolution. We argue (i) Dawkin's attempt to segregate developmental and evolutionary issues about genes is unsatisfactory. On plausible views of development it is arbitrary to single out genes as the units of selection. (ii) The genotype does not carry information about the phenotype in any way that distinguishes the role of the genes in development from that other factors. (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Kelly C. Smith (1992). Neo-Rationalism Versus Neo-Darwinism: Integrating Development and Evolution. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 7 (4):431-451.
    An increasing number of biologists are expressing discontent with the prevailing theory of neo-Darwinism. In particular, the tendency of neo-Darwinians to adopt genetic determinism and atomistic notions of both genes and organisms is seen as grossly unfair to the body of developmental theory. One faction of dissenteers, the Process Structuralists, take their inspiration from the rational morphologists who preceded Darwin. These neo-rationalists argue that a mature biology must possess universal laws and that these generative laws should be sought within organismal (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Kelly C. Smith (1992). The New Problem of Genetics: A Response to Gifford. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 7 (3):331-348.
    Recently, Fred Gifford attempted to explicate the meaning of the term genetic as applied to phenotypic traits. He takes as his primary goal the explication of how the term is used and tries to avoid conclusions about how it should be used. He proposes two independent criteria (DF and PI) which together capture much of what biologists mean when they describe traits as genetic. Although Gifford's approach is extremely insightful in many ways, I argue that his analysis is not sufficiently (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation