Overcoming the Newtonian Paradigm: The Unfinished Project of Theoretical Biology from a Schellingian Perspective
Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 113:5-24 (2013)
AbstractDefending Robert Rosen’s claim that in every confrontation between physics and biology it is physics that has always had to give ground, it is shown that many of the most important advances in mathematics and physics over the last two centuries have followed from Schelling’s demand for a new physics that could make the emergence of life intelligible. Consequently, while reductionism prevails in biology, many biophysicists are resolutely anti-reductionist. This history is used to identify and defend a fragmented but progressive tradition of anti-reductionist biomathematics. It is shown that the mathematicoephysico echemical morphology research program, the biosemiotics movement, and the relational biology of Rosen, although they have developed independently of each other, are built on and advance this antireductionist tradition of thought. It is suggested that understanding this history and its relationship to the broader history of post-Newtonian science could provide guidance for and justify both the integration of these strands and radically new work in post-reductionist biomathematics.
Similar books and articles
How to be an anti-reductionist about developmental biology: Response to Laubichler and Wagner.Greg Frost-Arnold - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 19 (1):75-91.
Taking the Relational Turn: Biosemiotics and Some New Trends in Biology. [REVIEW]Eliseo Fernández - 2010 - Biosemiotics 3 (2):147-156.
Between holism and reductionism: a philosophical primer on emergence.Massimo Pigliucci - 2013 - Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 112 (2):261-267.
The hidden battles over emergence.Carl Gillett - 2006 - In Philip Clayton (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science. Oxford University Press. pp. 801--819.
The Functional Perspective of Organismal Biology.Arno Wouters - 2005 - In Thomas Reydon & Lia Hemerik (eds.), Current Themes in Theoretical Biology. Springer. pp. 33--69.
Studying populations without molecular biology: Aster models and a new argument against reductionism.Emily Grosholz - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42 (2):246-251.
The differential method and the causal incompleteness of programming theory in molecular biology.Giuseppe Longo & Pierre-Emmanuel Tendero - 2007 - Foundations of Science 12 (4):337-366.
The peripherality of reductionism in the development of molecular biology.Kenneth F. Schaffner - 1974 - Journal of the History of Biology 7 (1):111-139.
Darwinian Reductionism, or, How to Stop Worrying and Love Molecular Biology.Alexander Rosenberg - 2006 - University of Chicago Press.
Molecular Models of Life: Philosophical Papers on Molecular Biology.Sahotra Sarkar - 2004 - Bradford.
Where Does Pattee’s “How Does a Molecule Become a Message?” Belong in the History of Biosemiotics?Jon Umerez - 2009 - Biosemiotics 2 (3):269-290.
On emergence, agency, and organization.Stuart Kauffman & Philip Clayton - 2006 - Biology and Philosophy 21 (4):501-521.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Beyond Desartes and Newton: Recovering life and humanity.Stuart A. Kauffman & Arran Gare - 2015 - Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 119 (3):219-244.
Natural Philosophy and the Sciences: Challenging Science’s Tunnel Vision.Arran Gare - 2018 - Philosophies 3 (4):33-0.
Semiosis and Information: Meeting the Challenge of Information Science to Post-Reductionist Biosemiotics.Arran Gare - 2020 - Biosemiotics 13 (3):327-346.
Why Natural Science Needs Phenomenological Philosophy.Steven M. Rosen - 2015 - Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 119:257-269.
References found in this work
Chance and Necessity: An Essay on the Natural Philosophy of Modern Biology.Jacques Monod - 1971 - New York: Vintage Books.