The mismeasure of machine: Synthetic biology and the trouble with engineering metaphors

Massimo Pigliucci
CUNY Graduate Center
The scientific study of living organisms is permeated by machine and design metaphors. Genes are thought of as the ‘‘blueprint’’ of an organism, organisms are ‘‘reverse engineered’’ to discover their func- tionality, and living cells are compared to biochemical factories, complete with assembly lines, transport systems, messenger circuits, etc. Although the notion of design is indispensable to think about adapta- tions, and engineering analogies have considerable heuristic value (e.g., optimality assumptions), we argue they are limited in several important respects. In particular, the analogy with human-made machines falters when we move down to the level of molecular biology and genetics. Living organisms are far more messy and less transparent than human-made machines. Notoriously, evolution is an oppor- tunistic tinkerer, blindly stumbling on ‘‘designs’’ that no sensible engineer would come up with. Despite impressive technological innovation, the prospect of artificially designing new life forms from scratch has proven more difficult than the superficial analogy with ‘‘programming’’ the right ‘‘software’’ would sug- gest. The idea of applying straightforward engineering approaches to living systems and their genomes— isolating functional components, designing new parts from scratch, recombining and assembling them into novel life forms—pushes the analogy with human artifacts beyond its limits. In the absence of a one-to-one correspondence between genotype and phenotype, there is no straightforward way to imple- ment novel biological functions and design new life forms. Both the developmental complexity of gene expression and the multifarious interactions of genes and environments are serious obstacles for ‘‘engi- neering’’ a particular phenotype. The problem of reverse-engineering a desired phenotype to its genetic ‘‘instructions’’ is probably intractable for any but the most simple phenotypes. Recent developments in the field of bio-engineering and synthetic biology reflect these limitations. Instead of genetically engi- neering a desired trait from scratch, as the machine/engineering metaphor promises, researchers are making greater strides by co-opting natural selection to ‘‘search’’ for a suitable genotype, or by borrowing and recombining genetic material from extant life forms.
Keywords synthetic biology  organisms as machines  scientific metaphors
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsc.2013.05.013
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

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

On the Origin of Species.Charles Darwin - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Exaptation–A Missing Term in the Science of Form.Stephen Jay Gould & Elisabeth S. Vrba - 1998 - In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Philosophy of Biology. Oxford University Press.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Engineering and Evolvability.Brett Calcott - 2014 - Biology and Philosophy 29 (3):293-313.
Do We Need a ‘Theory’ of Development?Ingo Brigandt - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (4):603-617.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Conception of Life in Synthetic Biology.Anna Deplazes-Zemp - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):757-774.
Synthetic Biology: A Challenge to Mechanical Explanations in Biology?Michel Morange - 2012 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 55 (4):543-553.


Added to PP index

Total views
1,456 ( #1,117 of 2,236,044 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
258 ( #1,300 of 2,236,044 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature