Abstract
What is the relation between things andtheories, the material world and its scientificrepresentations? This is a staple philosophicalproblem that rarely counts as historically legitimate or fruitful. In the followingdialogue, the interlocutors do not argue for oragainst realism. Instead, they explorechanging relations between theories and things,between contested objects of knowledge (likethe cell) and less contested, moreeveryday things (like frog eggs scooped from apond). Widely seen as the life sciences' firstgeneral theory, the cell theory underwentdramatic changes during the nineteenth century. The dialogue establishes that each successiveversion of the cell theory was formulated –each identity of the object cell wasformed – around a different material: cork,cartilage, eggs in cleavage, muscle. Suchthings thus serve as exemplary materials, inways not described by standard concepts likeinduction, theory-testing, theory-ladenobservation, and construction. Still, how cantheories and perspective possibly be honedon things if these are apprehended differentlyby different observers according to theirinterests, training, culture, or indeedtheories? The second part of the dialogueaddresses this problem, partly through theverbal and visual schemata that were used bynineteenth-century microscopists and that arecomparable to schemata in the visual arts. Thethird part of the dialogue considers theexemplary materials as a historical sequence,itself needing explanation. Theoretical changedevolved partly from wider histories andgeographies of the prevalence, availability, orscientific and cultural status of materialssuch as plants, animals, and muscle.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, G. 1975. “The Introduction of Drosophilainto the Study of Heredity and Evolution, 1900-1910.” Isis66: 322-333.
-- 1978.Life Sciences in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press.
Baer, K. E. von. 1828. Ueber Entwicklungsgeschichte der Thiere: Beobachtung und Reflexion. Königsberg.
-- 1834. “Die Metamorphose des Eies der Batrachier vor der Erscheinung des Embryo und Folgerungen aus ihr für die Theorie der Erzeugung.” Archiv für Anatomie, Physiologie und wissenschaftliche Medizin: 481-509.
Baker, J. R. 1948-1955. The Cell Theory: A Restatement, History, and Critique, 5 parts. Reprinted from Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science.New York and London: Garland, 1988.
Bertuca, D. J. et al., eds. 1996. The World's Columbian Exposition: A Centennial BibliographicGuide. Greenwood Press.
Biagoli, M., ed. 1999. The Science Studies Reader. New York: Routledge.
Brain, R. M. and M. N. Wise. 1994. “Muscles and Engines: Indicator Diagrams and Helmholtz's Graphical Methods.” In Biagoli, 1999, pp. 51-66.
Braudel, F. 1972. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II, trans. S. Reynolds, 2 vols. London: Collins.
Buchwald, J. Z., ed. 1995. Scientific Practice: Theories and Stories of Doing Physics. University of Chicago Press.
Burian, R. and M. Lederman, eds. 1993. “The Right Organism for the Job.” Symposium in Journal of the History of Biology26: 233-368.
Burian, R. 1993. “How the Choice of Experimental Organism Matters: Epistemological Reflections on an Aspect of Biological Practice.” Journal of the History of Biology26: 351-368.
Canguilhem, G. 1989 [1945/52]. “La Théorie cellulaire.” In: Canguilhem, La connaissance de la vie. Paris: Vrin.
-- 1994 [1945/52]. “Cell Theory.” In A Vital Rationalist: Selected Writings from Georges Canguilhem, ed. F. Delaporte, pp. 161-177. New York: Zone Books.
Cartwright, N. 1983. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Clarendon.
Clarke, A. E. 1987. “Research Materials and Reproductive Science in the United States, 1910-1940.” In Physiology in the American Context, 1850-1940, ed. G. L. Geison, pp. 323-350. Bethesda: American Physiological Society.
Clarke, A. E. and J. H. Fujimura, eds. 1992. The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in the Twentieth-Century Life Sciences. Princeton University Press.
Clause, B. T. 1993. “The Wistar Rat as a Right Choice: Establishing Mammalian Standards and the Ideal of a Standardized Mammal.” Journal of the History of Biology26: 329-350.
Cohn, F. 1850. “Nachträge zur Naturgeschichte des Protococcus Plurialis Kützing.” Novorum Actorum Academiae Caesareae Leopoldino-Carolinae Naturae Curiosorum14: 605-764.
Curd, M. and J. A. Cover, eds. 1998. Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York: W.W. Norton.
Daston, L. and P. Galison. 1992. “The Image of Objectivity.” Representations40: 81-128.
Daston, L., ed. 2000. Biographies of Scientific Objects. University of Chicago Press.
Fraassen, B. C. van. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon.
Franklin, A. 1989. “The Epistemology of Experiment.” In Gooding, Pinch and chaffer, eds., pp. 437-460.
Gegenbaur, C. 1874. Grundriss der vergleichenden Anatomie. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.
Geison, G. L. 1969. “The Protoplasmic Theory of Life and the Vitalist-Mechanist Debate.” Isis60: 273-292.
Geison, G. L. and A. N. H. Craeger. 1999. “Introduction: Research Materials and Model Organisms in the Biological and Biomedical Sciences.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences30: 315-318.
Gombrich, E. H. 1984. Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. The A.W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts, 1956. Princeton University Press.
Gooday, G. 1991. “ 'Nature' in the Laboratory: Domestication and Discipline with the Microscope in Victorian Life Science.” British Journal for the History of Science24: 307-341.
Gooding, D., T. Pinch and S. Schaffer, eds. 1989. The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences. Cambridge University Press.
Grimm, J. and W. Grimm. 1854-1962. Deutsches Wörterbuch, 16 vols. in 32. Leipzig: Hirzel.
Grew, N. 1682. The Anatomy of Plants. London.
Hacking, I. 1983. Representing and Intervening. Cambridge University Press.
Hall, T. S. 1951. A Source Book of Animal Biology. Harvard University Press.
Hanson, N. R. 1958. Patterns of Discovery: An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science. Cambridge University Press.
Hertwig, O. 1893. Die Zelle und die Gewebe: Grundzüge der allgemeinen Anatomie und Physiologie. Jena: Fischer.
Holmes, F. L. 1993. “The Old Martyr of Science: The Frog in Experimental Physiology.” Journal of the History of Biology26: 311-328.
Hooke, R. 1665. Micrographia: or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies Made by Magnifying Glasses with Observations and Inquiries Thereupon. London.
Jacyna, L. S. 1983. “John Goodsir and the Making of Cellular Reality.” Journal of the History of Biology16: 75-99.
-- 1984. “The Romantic Programme and the Reception of Cell Theory in Britain.” Journal of the History of Biology17: 13-48.
Jones, C. A. and P. Galison. 1998. “Picturing Science, Producing Art.” In Picturing Science, Producing Art, eds. Jones and Galison, pp. 1-23. London: Routledge.
Koerner, J. L. 1998. “Hieronymus Bosch'sWorld Picture.” In Jones and Galison, eds., pp. 297-323.
Kohler, R. E. 1994. Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life. University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press.
Mazzolini, R. G. 1988. Politisch-biologische Analogien im Frühwerk Rudolf Virchows, trans. K.-P. Tieck. Marburg: Basilisken-Presse.
Mendelsohn, J. A. 1998. “From Eradication to Equilibrium: How Epidemics Become Complex afterWorldWar I.” In Greater than the Parts: Holism in Biomedicine, 1920-1950, eds. C. Lawrence and G. Weisz. Oxford University Press.
Mitman, G. and A. Fausto-Sterling. 1992. “Whatever Happened to Planaria? C.M. Child and the Physiology of Inheritance.” In Clarke and Fujimura, eds., pp. 172-197.
Pickering, A. 1989. “Living in the Material World.” In Gooding, Pinch, and Schaffer, eds., pp. 275-297.
-- 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. University of Chicago Press.
-- 1995. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. University of Chicago Press.
Planck, M. 1936. The Philosophy of Physics, trans. W. H. Johnston. London: Allen and Unwin.
Prevost, J-L. and J-B. Dumas. 1824. “Deuxième mémoire sur la génération.” Annales des sciences naturelles2: 100-121, 129-149.
Rabinbach, A. 1990. The Human Motor: Energy, Fatigue, and the Origins of Modernity. New York: Basic Books.
Rader, K. A. 1999. “Of Mice, Medicine, and Genetics: C.C. Little's Creation of the Inbred Laboratory Mouse, 1909-1918.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences30: 319-343.
Reichert, K. B. 1840. Das Entwickelungsleben im Wirbelthier-Reich. Berlin: August Hirschwald.
-- 1841. “Ueber den Furchungs-Process der Batrachier-Eier.” Archiv für Anatomie, Physiologie und wissenschaftliche Medizin: 523-541.
Remak, R. 1852. “Ueber extracellulare Entstehung thierischer Zellen und über Vermehrung derselben durch Theilung.” Archiv für Anatomie, Physiologie und wissenschaftliche Medizin: 47-57.
-- 1855. Untersuchungen über die Entwickelung der Wirbelthiere. Berlin: G. Reimer.
Rheinberger, H-J. 1997. Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube. Stanford University Press.
Risse, G. B. 1979. “Epidemics and Medicine: The Influence of Disease on Medical Thought and Practice.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine53: 505-519.
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1976. “The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science, 1760-1840.” History of Science14: 149-195.
Schultze, M. 1861. “Ueber Muskelkörperchen und das, was man eine Zelle zu nennen habe.” Archiv für Anatomie, Physiologie und wissenschaftliche Medizin: 1-27.
Schwann, T. 1838. “Ueber die Analogie in der Structur und dem Wachstume der Thiere und Pflanzen.” Neue Notizen aus dem Gebiete der Natur-und Heilkunde(January) 5: cols. 33-36.
-- 1847 [1839]. Microscopical Researches into the Accordance in the Structure and Growth of Animals and Plants, trans. H. Smith. London.
Stevenson, L. G. 1982. “Exemplary Disease: The Typhoid Pattern.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences37: 159-181.
Todes, D. P. 1989. Darwin without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought. Oxford University Press.
Virchow, R. 1863. Cellular Pathology, as Based upon Physiological and Pathological Histology, trans. F. Chance. Dover Publications, 1971.
Weindling, P. 1981. “Theories of the Cell-State in Imperial Germany.” In Biology, Medicine and Society, 1840-1940, ed. C. Webster. Cambridge University Press.
Whitman, C. O. 1885. Methods of Research in Microscopical Anatomy and Embryology. Boston: Cassino.
-- 1893. “The Inadequacy of the Cell-Theory of Development.” Journal of Morphology8: 639-658.
Wilson, E. B. 1896. The Cell in Development and Inheritance. New York and London: Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mendelsohn, J.A. Lives of the Cell. Journal of the History of Biology 36, 1–37 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022591924692
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022591924692