History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 33 (1):105-127 (2011)
The chemical characterization of the substance responsible for the phenomenon of “transformation” of pneumococci was presented in the now famous 1944 paper by Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty. Reception of this work was mixed. Although interpreting their results as evidence that deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the molecule responsible for genetic changes was, at the time, controversial, this paper has been retrospectively celebrated as providing such evidence. The mixed and changing assessment of the evidence presented in the paper was due to the work’s interpretive flexibility – the evidence was interpreted in various ways, and such interpretations were justified given the neophytic state of molecular biology and methodological limitations of Avery’s transformation studies. I argue that the changing context in which the evidence presented by Avery’s group was interpreted partly explains the vicissitudes of the assessments of the evidence. Two less compelling explanations of the reception are a myth-making account and an appeal to the wartime historical context of its publication.
|Keywords||evidence evidential context gene transforming substance Avery|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Evidence in Biology and the Conditions of Success.Jacob Stegenga - 2013 - Biology and Philosophy 28 (6):981-1004.
Bacterial Transformation and the Origins of Epidemics in the Interwar Period: The Epidemiological Significance of Fred Griffith’s “Transforming Experiment”.Pierre-Olivier Méthot - forthcoming - Journal of the History of Biology.
Similar books and articles
Early Responses to Avery Et Al.'S Paper on DNA as Hereditary Material.U. Deichmann - 2004 - Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 34 (2):207-232.
Evidence of Evidence is Not (Necessarily) Evidence.Branden Fitelson - 2012 - Analysis 72 (1):85-88.
Conditionalizing on Knowledge.Timothy Williamson - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):89-121.
Not Enough There There: Evidence, Reasons, and Language Independence.Michael G. Titelbaum - 2010 - Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):477-528.
Intuitions Are Inclinations to Believe.Joshua Earlenbaugh & Bernard Molyneux - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 145 (1):89 - 109.
Robust Evidence and Secure Evidence Claims.Kent W. Staley - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (4):467-488.
Evidence and Hypothesis: An Analysis of Evidential Relations.Helen E. Longino - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (1):35-56.
“Molecular Gene”: Interpretation in the Right Context. [REVIEW]Degeng Wang - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):453-464.
On the Alleged Perversity of the Evidential View of Testimony.Arnon Keren - 2012 - Analysis 72 (4):700-707.
Robustness, Discordance, and Relevance.Jacob Stegenga - 2009 - Philosophy of Science 76 (5):650-661.
Oswald T. Avery: Nobel Laureate or Noble Luminary?Frank Portugal - 2010 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 53 (4):558-570.
Added to index2011-10-03
Total downloads140 ( #31,817 of 2,146,822 )
Recent downloads (6 months)19 ( #23,117 of 2,146,822 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.