Scientiae Studia 13 (3):577-597 (2015)

Abstract
RESUMENEl desarrollo embriológico es un fenómeno que ha inspirado la especulación filosófica desde temprano en la historia del pensamiento. Desde los tiempos de Aristóteles dos modelos conceptuales antitéticos se han utilizado tradicionalmente para comprender la embriogénesis: o el embrión posee ya una forma o estructura, o ésta se forma de nuevo en cada generación. Nuestro objetivo en este artículo es mostrar que el contraste entre la posición preformacionista y epigenética persiste a pesar de los formidables avances teóricos y experimentales de la biología del desarrollo contemporánea. El preformacionismo y la epigénesis han perfeccionado constantemente sus posiciones en el curso de la historia con el fin de responder a los retos conceptuales de la época. Este continuo proceso de transformación ha dado lugar a una convergencia parcial entre las dos posiciones. Sin embargo, vamos a argumentar que, a pesar de los esfuerzos por conciliar ambas posturas, esta antinomia, que se erige como una de las más fundamentales de la biología, no será fácil de superar. ABSTRACTThe process of development of the embryo has inspired philosophical speculation since the advent of Western thought. Since the time of Aristotle two antithetical conceptual models have traditionally been used to understand embryogenesis: either form or structure is preformed in the embryo or it is newly formed with each generation. Our aim in this article is to show that the contrast between the pre-formationist and epigenetic positions persists despite the formidable theoretical and experimental advances of contemporary developmental biology. Pre-formationism and epigenesis have constantly refined their positions in the course of history in order to answer the conceptual challenges of each epoch. This process of continuous transformation has resulted in a partial convergence of the two positions. However, we shall argue that, despite the partial successes of this process of continuous convergence, one of the most fundamental antinomies in biology persists
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1590/S1678-31662015000300005
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: 71,199
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

A History of Molecular Biology.Michel Morange & Matthew Cobb - 1999 - Journal of the History of Biology 32 (3):568-570.
Reductionism Redux: Computing the Embryo. [REVIEW]Alex Rosenberg - 1997 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):445-470.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Epigenesis as Spinozism in Diderot’s Biological Project (Draft).Charles T. Wolfe - 2014 - In O. Nachtomy J. E. H. Smith (ed.), The Life Sciences in Early Modern Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 181-201.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-10-20

Total views
23 ( #495,069 of 2,517,926 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #206,126 of 2,517,926 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes