Authors
Karola Stotz
Last affiliation: Macquarie University
Abstract
Philosophers and historians of biology have argued that genes are conceptualized differently in different fields of biology and that these differences influence both the conduct of research and the interpretation of research by audiences outside the field in which the research was conducted. In this paper we report the results of a questionnaire study of how genes are conceptualized by biological scientists at the University of Sydney, Australia. The results provide tentative support for some hypotheses about conceptual differences between different fields of biological research.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.09.005
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Innateness as Closed Process Invariance.Ron Mallon & Jonathan M. Weinberg - 2006 - Philosophy of Science 73 (3):323-344.
Genetic Information as Instructional Content.Ulrich E. Stegmann - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (3):425-443.
Experimental philosophy of medicine and the concepts of health and disease.Walter Veit - 2021 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 42 (3):169-186.

View all 41 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How Biologists Conceptualize Genes: An Empirical Study.Karola Stotz, Paul E. Griffiths & Rob Knight - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 35 (4):647-673.
Genes: Philosophical Analyses Put to the Test.Karola Stotz & Paul Griffiths - 2004 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 26 (1):5-28.
How-Possibly Explanations in Biology.David B. Resnik - 1991 - Acta Biotheoretica 39 (2):141-149.
Genes Made Molecular.C. Kenneth Waters - 1994 - Philosophy of Science 61 (2):163-185.
Why Genes Are Like Lemons.F. Boem, E. Ratti, M. Andreoletti & G. Boniolo - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 57 (June):88-95.
Experimental Philosophy of Biology: Notes From the Field.Karola Stotz - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (2):233-237.
Naturalists, Molecular Biologists, and the Challenges of Molecular Evolution.Joel B. Hagen - 1999 - Journal of the History of Biology 32 (2):321 - 341.
Approximations, Idealizations and 'Experiments' at the Physics-Biology Interface.Darrell Patrick Rowbottom - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42 (2):145-154.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-20

Total views
26 ( #436,596 of 2,499,056 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #419,059 of 2,499,056 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes