Abstract
This paper analyzes the role played by the criterion of simplicity in the construction and evaluation of the Chromosome Theory of Mendelian Inheritance. First, I briefly discuss some views on simplicity held by philosophers. We can see that despite their different views on scientific methodology and epistemology, most of them consider simplicity as a substantive value that is used in science to choose between theories. Then I analyze the arguments used by scientists to evaluate the hypothesis that genes are pieces of chromosomes to see whether simplicity played any role in their decisions. My conclusion is that the simplicity of the hypothesis that identified the genes with the chromosomes was not taken as a reason to accept it. Finally, I argue that the unifying character of a hypothesis and the ontological and descriptive simplicity achieved by it, should not be taken as reasons for its plausibility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boveri, Th., 1903, “Ueber die Konstitution der Chromatischen Kernsubstanz”, Verh. deutsch. zool. Ges. 13, 10–33.
Boyd, R., 1985, “Observations, Explanatory Power, and Simplicity: Toward a Non-Humean Account”, in P. Achinstein and O. Hannaway (eds.), Observation, Experiment, and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, 47–94.
Brandt, R. & Kim, J., 1967, “The Logic of the Identity Theory”, The Journal of Philosophy 64, 515–537.
Bridges, C. B., 1916, “Non-disjunction as Proof of the Chromosome Theory of Heredity”, Genetics 1, 1–52, 107–163
Bruce R. Voeller, ed. The Chromosome Theory of Inheritance, Appleton Century Crofts, New York, 1968, 197–208.
Bridges, C.B., 1914, “Direct Proof through Non-disjunction that the Sex-linked Genes of Drosophila are Borne by the X-Chromosome”, Science 40, 107–109.
Doncaster, L., 1910, Heredity in the Light of Recent Research, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Forster, M. R., 1988, “Unification, Explanation, and the Composition of Causes in Newtonian Mechanics,” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 19, 55–101.
Friedman, M., 1974, “Explanation and Scientific Understanding”, The Journal of Philosophy 71, 5–19.
Goldschmidt, R. B., 1954, “Different Philosophies of Genetics”, Science 119, 703–710.
Goodman, N., 1958, “The Test of Simplicity”, Science 128, 1064–68.
Harré, R., 1960, An Introduction to the Logic of the Sciences (2nd edn., 1983 ), Macmillan, London.
Hesse, M., 1974, The Structure of Scientific Inference, Macmillan, London.
Kitcher, P., 1976, “Explanation, Conjunction, and Unification”, The Journal of Philosophy 73, 207–12.
Kitcher, P., 1981, “Explanatory Unification”, Philosophy of Science 48, 507–531.
Kuhn, T., 1970, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lloyd, E., 1983, “The Nature of Darwin’s Support for the Theory of Natural Selection”, Philosophy of Science 50, 112–129.
Maxwell, N., 1974, “The Rationality of Scientific Discovery”, Philosophy of Science 41, 123–153, 247–295.
McAllister, J., 1991, “The Simplicity of Theories: Its Degree and Form”, Journal for General Philosophy of Science 22, 1–41.
Miller, R., 1987, Fact and Method, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Morgan, T. H., 1910, “Chromosomes and Heredity”, The American Naturalist 44, 449–96.
Morgan, T. H., 1911, “Random Segregation versus Coupling in Mendelian Inheritance”, Science 34, 384.
Morgan, T. H., 1915, “Localization of the Hereditary Material in the Germ Cells”, National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings 1, 420–429.
Morgan, T. H., 1917, “The Theory of the Gene”, The American Naturalist 51, 513–544.
Morgan, T. H., 1923, “On the Mechanism of Heredity”, Royal Society of London, Proceedings B94, 162–197.
Morgan, T. H., Sturtevant, A. H., Muller, H. J., and Bridges, C. B., 1915, The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity, Henry Holt, New York.
Nickles, T., 1986, “Remarks on the Use of History as Evidence”, Synthese 69, 253–266.
Popper, K., 1959, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London.
Quine, W., 1953, “On What There Is”, in From a Logical Point of View, Harper Torchbooks, New York.
Quine, W., 1966, “Simple Theories of A Complex World”, in The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays, Random House, New York, 242–6.
Ravin, A. W., 1965, The Evolution of Genetics, Academic Press, New York and London.
Rudner, R., 1965, “An Introduction to Simplicity”, in D. Shapere (ed.), Philosophical Problems of Natural Science, MacMillan, London.
Salmon, W., 1966, The Foundations of Scientific Inference,University of Pittsburgh Press.
Schaffner, K. F., 1974, “Logic of Discovery and Justification in Regulatory Genetics”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 4, 349–385.
Sober, E., 1975, Simplicity, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Sober, E., 1981, “The Principle of Parsimony”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32, 145–56.
Sober, E., 1988, Reconstructing the Past: Parsimony, Evolution, and Inference, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets.
Sturtevant, A. H., 1965, A History of Genetics, Harper & Row, New York.
Sutton, W. S., 1902, “On the Morphology of the Chromosome Group of Brachystola magna, Biological Bulletin 4, 24–39.
Sutton, W. S., 1903, “The Chromosomes in Heredity”, Biological Bulletin 4, 231–248.
Thagard, P. R., 1978, “The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice”, The Journal of Philosophy 75, 76–92.
van Fraassen, B., 1980, The Scientific Image, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Vicedo, M., 1990a, “The Chromosome Theory of Mendelian Inheritance: Explanation and Realism in Theory Construction”, in A. Fine, M. Forbes & L. Wessels (eds.), PSA 19901, 179–91.
Vicedo, M., 1990b, “T. H. Morgan, Neither an Epistemological Empiricist nor a ‘Methodological’ Empiricist”, Biology and Philosophy 5, 293–311.
Vicedo M., 1991, “Realism and Simplicity in the Castle-East Debate on the Stability of the Hereditary Units: Rhetorical Devices versus Substantive Methodology”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 22, 201–21.
Wilson, E. B. 1914, “The Bearing of Cytological Research on Heredity”, Royal Society of London. Proceedings B 88, 333–352.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vicedo, M. (1994). Simplicity in Theory-Construction and Evaluation: The Case of the Chromosome Theory of Mendalian Inheritance. In: Prawitz, D., Westerståhl, D. (eds) Logic and Philosophy of Science in Uppsala. Synthese Library, vol 236. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8311-4_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8311-4_34
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4365-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8311-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive