Biology and Philosophy 7 (4):431-451 (1992)
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 development. Such a rational biology will only be possible once the neo-Darwinian paradigm, with its reliance on inherently stochastic processes, is overthrown.To facilitate this revolution, process structuralism launches a broad attack on the theoritical adequacy of its opponent. It is charged that neo-Darwinism is untestable and therefore its hypotheses are nothing more than adaptive stories. Further, the lamentable tendencies toward genetic determinism and atomism by modern biologists is seen as the inescapable consequences of adopting the neo-Darwinian outlook.
|Keywords||Darwinism epigenetic genetic genotype phenotype rationalism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World.Wesley Salmon - 1984 - Princeton University Press.
Problems And Paradigms: Metaphors and the Role of Genes in Development.H. F. Nijhout - 1990 - Bioessays 12 (9):441-446.
Citations of this work BETA
Explanatory Integration Challenges in Evolutionary Systems Biology.Sara Green, Melinda Fagan & Johannes Jaeger - 2015 - Biological Theory 10 (1):18-35.
The Extended Replicator.Kim Sterelny, Kelly C. Smith & Michael Dickison - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):377-403.
Regulatory Constructivism: On the Relation Between Evolutionary Epistemology and Piaget's Genetic Epistemology. [REVIEW]C. A. Hooker - 1994 - Biology and Philosophy 9 (2):197-244.
Similar books and articles
Conceptual Barriers to Progress Within Evolutionary Biology.N. Laland Kevin, Odling-Smee John, W. Feldman Marcus & Kendal Jeremy - 2009 - Foundations of Science 14 (3):195-216.
Taking Biology Seriously : Neo-Darwinism and its Many Challenges.Davide Vecchi - 2012 - In Martin H. Brinkworth & Friedel Weinert (eds.), Evolution 2.0: Implications of Darwinism in Philosophy and the Social and Natural Sciences. Springer.
Evolution and Atheism: Has Griffin Reconciled Science and Religion?James H. Fetzer - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):381 - 396.
Genes and Citizens: Can Moral Philosophy Learn From Evolutionary Biology?Alan Haworth - 2001 - Res Publica 7 (2):137-157.
The Equivalence of Neo-Darwinism and Walrasian Equilibrium: In Defense of Organismus Economicus.Elias L. Khalil & Alain Marciano - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (2):229-248.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads35 ( #147,668 of 2,172,044 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #325,337 of 2,172,044 )
How can I increase my downloads?